Classic Twofer – ‘Death Wish’ & ‘Death Wish 3’ – Bite the Big Apple (Don’t Mind the Maggots)



You might look at these two movies and say that they’re similar, and you’d be right, but they are definitely not the same.

Much like the stories of another famous fictional vigilante (Batman), the Death Wish films exist on multiple gradient scales, namely serious to cartoonish, and feel-bad to feel-good (more like feel-alright, but you get the point).

Amazingly though, these two divergent examples have the same director (a real John Glen, if you will).

Let’s get to it.

Original Release Date: July 24, 1974

Directed by Michael Winner
Written by Wendell Mayes, based on the novel by Brian Garfield
Cast: Charles Bronson, Hope Lange, Vincent Gardenia, William Redfield, Steven Keats, Stuart Margolin, Stephen Elliott, Kathleen Tolan, Jeff Goldblum, Christopher Guest, Olympia Dukakis, Paul Dooley
Soundtrack: Herbie Hancock

In contrast to the set-piece driven action films that would become the hallmark of the vigilante sub-genre, 1974’s Death Wish is much more of a bona fide drama, with interesting story choices and at least a modicum of depth to its main character (I think “protagonist” is a bit of a stretch).

Paul Kersey (Charles Bronson) doesn’t even shoot anybody until nearly halfway through the film, and it’s a literal journey to get there: we start in Hawaii, with he and his wife on vacation; then they come back to the concrete jungle of New York; wife and daughter are assaulted by hoodlums (one played by Jeff Goldblum); wife dies, daughter is mentally destroyed; then Kersey goes to Arizona on a job and the client takes him to a gun club, where we learn one or two things about Paul; then he comes back to New York again and starts killing muggers, and the police investigate.

The point is though, we see Kersey’s transition from mild-mannered architect to cold-blooded assassin of the night, and it is unvarnished, if not downright ugly. People often criticize this movie as some sort of right-wing jingoistic manifesto, but I think the truth is a little more complicated. Death Wish asks you to understand Paul Kersey (if it even asks that much), not necessarily agree with him (that’s up to you). Maybe it’s just me, but whatever “fun” entertainment value the movie has comes much more from the police chasing the vigilante (especially Vincent Gardenia) than from the vigilante himself.

I should also mention that Death Wish, while a smaller scale movie, is decidedly a picture from a major studio. Not a huge budget, but on par with other comparable productions. For one thing, its New York City is all real (and in winter; rough), and there’s some production design (fake advertisements and such) that a shoot with less backing might find difficult to implement.

If I have one particular criticism, and I hate to disparage a dead man, but Steven Keats’ performance as Kersey’s son-in-law sticks out like a sore thumb. I’ll cut him some slack because I imagine it’s what the director wanted, but it takes me out of the movie every time.

All-in-all, Death Wish is probably more influential than actually great, and it’s certainly of its time, but it’s still a solid watch, and not without some remaining resonance today (sadly).

Rating: ★★★½ (out of five)


Original Release Date: November 1, 1985

Directed by Michael Winner
Written by Don Jakoby, based on characters created by Brian Garfield
Cast: Charles Bronson, Deborah Raffin, Ed Lauter, Martin Balsam, Gavan O’Herlihy, Kirk Taylor, Alex Winter, Ricco Ross, Joe Gonzalez, Marina Sirtis, Barbie Wilde, Billy J. Mitchell, Manning Redwood
Soundtrack: Jimmy Page

After the feel-bad opus of Death Wish II (Want to feel just awful? Put that one on), director Michael Winner finally decided to lighten things up.

The result is 1985’s Death Wish 3.

At a time when vigilante films were already becoming live-action cartoons (Vigilante, Exterminator 2), Winner pushed the envelope even further, creating one of the ultimate “turn your brain off” action movies of the decade. Unfortunately, there’s still some of his signature sadism left in (Marina Sirtis is rightfully still bitter about it), but, compared to the previous entry, it’s downright breezy.

It’s also far more unambiguous in its storytelling than the first one: Paul Kersey comes back to New York from exile in Los Angeles; his friend Charlie gets confronted by some thugs (one played by Alex Winter) while Paul is literally on his way to visit Charlie, and so Charlie dies in Paul’s arms; Paul gets taken into police custody, but then turned loose by the police chief who knows who he is and wants him to do what he does; and before too long (end of the first act), Kersey has gone to war with the local [inexplicably multi-racial] gang.

In more contrast to the original, Death Wish 3 is (adjusted for inflation) a much cheaper movie. There’s enough actual New York City to make it plausible, but it was largely shot in London to save on costs, and thus the cast is filled with American expats (if not downright UK citizens).

Not that it matters, because while there are some minor twists and turns in the story, the most important aspect of the film is that the last fifteen minutes devolves into glorious chaos, punctuated by the fact that our protagonist is a sexagenarian.

Not the same quality as its predecessor, but entertaining in its own right.

Rating: ★★★½ (out of five)


There you have it. Two Death Wishes: one bad-good, one good-bad. And Bronson might be even more charming in the latter…

Quick Thoughts – September Round-Up, Part 2

‘Judgment Night’ (1993)

People who know this movie seem to have a soft spot for it, but I just don’t see what they see.

Now, I am slightly bending the rules here, because while I did technically see this in a theater, it wasn’t a film print or any kind of high resolution projection; it was on VHS, which makes sense from a nostalgia perspective given just how 90s ‘Judgment Night’ is, but it makes my job as a reviewer much harder, because so much picture quality is lost (not to mention the whole pan-and-scan issue).  That said, I think my thoughts are generally still valid, but, feel free to take them with a grain of salt on this one.

My biggest issue with ‘Judgment Night’, besides feeling its length, is the fact that it demands to be taken so, so seriously, and I just can’t give it that kind of credence.  I don’t think any of the performances are special (not even Denis Leary), the script doesn’t offer much in terms of actual surprises, and, most importantly, I never felt connected enough to any of the characters to really care if they made it or not.  Also, I’m not normally a super nit-picky guy, but the fact that the movie is supposed to be in Chicago, and is so obviously like 90% L.A., it did take me out of the movie just a bit.  I feel like I should be more into movies that take place over the course of one night, but the evidence isn’t stacking up that way (e.g. ‘After Hours‘).

However, just because I didn’t really like ‘Judgment Night’ doesn’t mean I don’t think it should get better treatment on home format.  Honestly, with the amount of horrible schlock getting restored and re-releaseed on Blu-ray these days, you’d think somebody would take a flyer on this one, especially since it appears to have an audience and features so many notable actors.  I’d sure be willing to give it a second look then.

Rating: ★★½ (out of five)

 

Bill & Ted’s Excellent Adventure (1989)
Bill & Ted’s Bogus Journey (1991)

I had never seen either of these before, and I was a little worried about being able to connect to them.  After all, I already have a history degree; what do I care if these bums can’t ace their presentation?  But, I have to give credit to writers Chris Matheson and Ed Solomon for coming up with a delightfully bonkers concept, and directors Stephen Herek (who has a really interesting filmography, at least for his first fifteen years directing) and Peter Hewett for committing to it and having fun with it, while not overly winking at the audience.  The vapidness of the Bill and Ted characters belies the cleverness of the movies themselves.

‘Excellent Adventure’ is a fun romp through history, as our heroes bounce around time (and geography), accumulating “personages of historical significance” along the way, eventually bringing them back to present day Southern California (and the mall), which leads to a lot of fun fish-out-of-water humor (I particularly enjoyed Napoleon at the water park).  The movie (and its sequel) also plays with the notion of time travel as a screenwriter’s convenient friend, as in our heroes being privy to necessary items just in the nick of time (kind of hard to explain, but if you see the movie, you’ll know exactly what I mean).  There’s also a lot of humor outside of the main plot, like how Bill’s stepmom was a Senior when they were Freshmen, and other students’ presentations (“San Dimas High School football rules!”).

But how do you top time travel?  ‘Bogus Journey’ answers this question by sending Bill and Ted to HELL (and other places in the spirit realm/afterlife).  In all honesty, ‘Bogus Journey’ is a rare sequel that lives up to (and almost exceeds) the original, by expanding on the already existing concepts while also adding its own flavor.  However, as generally fresh as it is, it also might be the most sequel sequel to ever sequel, seeing as how it has the bad guys from ‘Lethal Weapon 2‘ and ‘Die Hard 2‘, respectively, but this is just me having fun.  One of my favorite moments is the humorous homage to the “game with Death” from Ingmar Bergman’s ‘The Seventh Seal’ (you’ll definitely know this when you see it).

All-in-all, these two films make a great double feature (partially because they clock in around ninety minutes each).  They’re funny, they’re clever, and they look and sound surprisingly good (I definitely would not call them chintzy).  Sure, maybe they’re not ‘Back to the Future’, but what is?  I’m pleasantly surprised to be able to recommend them.

(Also, I don’t know if this is a major point of discussion, but I’m definitely a Bill guy over a Ted guy.)

Dual Rating: ★★★★☆

 

‘Sleepy Hollow’ (1999)

Speaking of giving credit where credit is due, I have to give it up to Tim Burton on this one.  It’s no secret that I’m generally not a fan of his, but ‘Sleepy Hollow’ works pretty well for me (which I’ll come back to).

However, as he’s wont to do, Burton goes too far in a few places.  As much as I enjoy the ensemble cast, and as much as I enjoy Christopher Walken himself, the sight of him with razor-sharp teeth is absolutely ridiculous.  Also, the whole subplot of Ichabod Crane as a child is more than a bit overdone, not to mention it feels like a poor excuse to get Burton’s then-girlfriend Lisa Marie into the film (for those unaware, she came before Helena Bonham Carter, and that’s all I’ll say about that).  And, naturally, there’s Danny Elfman’s score, which I’m not going to say is all bad, but there are some elements that evoke the stereotype of a “typical Elfman score” that, culturally, we’ve become so familiar with.

All that said, the movie is pretty enjoyable.  The ensemble cast, as I mentioned, is wonderful, from Martin Landau in an uncredited cameo, to Michael Gambon and Miranda Richardson, to, of course, Johnny Depp as Police Constable (and nascent criminologist/medical examiner) Ichabod Crane.

‘Sleepy Hollow’ does an admirable job of putting a fresh face on a classic story that’s been done many times over, while also throwing in knowing nods to past adaptations.  And, not unlike the recent ‘Train to Busan‘, I think the movie could be described as “general audience horror.”

Definitely one for the Halloween watch-list.

Rating: ★★★½ (out of five)

Quick Thoughts – August Round-Up

Across 110th Street (1972)

Anyone who’s seen Quentin Tarantino’s Jackie Brown is familiar with this title, as the Bobby Womack single of the same name (which appears on the soundtrack album but not in the actual movie?) plays at both the beginning and end of that film.

It gets lumped in with the Blaxploitation genre, but after seeing it, it’s clear that Across 110th Street doesn’t belong there.  For one thing, the tone is too serious (there’s nothing really tongue-in-cheek about it), and there’s no strong, Black protagonist, because there’s no protagonist of any kind (we’ll come back to that).

Let’s back up for a second.  Across 100th Street begins with the violent theft of a large sum of Italian mob money by three Black robbers.  From there, it’s a race against time between the mobsters and the cops to find out who did it; the cops wanting justice for their gunned-down brethren, and the mob wanting to set an example to those who would try to steal from them.

This is where things get problematic for me, because the movie constantly cuts around between the three concerned parties (thieves, mobsters, cops), which is fine in theory, but in practice it doesn’t really allow you to connect with any character in particular, good, bad, or otherwise, and thus you never really connect with the movie as a whole.

This is not to say Across 110th Street is terrible.  As well as having some entertaining moments, the movie addresses serious issues in a mature fashion, which is admirable.  I just wasn’t expecting it to be so cold and flat from a stylistic standpoint.  It’s one thing to go that route for a based-on-a-true-story movie (like Tora! Tora! Tora!), or a this-is-what-could-happen movie (like Contagion), but for a fictional police procedural I don’t think it’s the best idea.

Rating: ★★★☆☆

 

eXistenZ (1999)

If you made a cocktail out of Videodrome, The Matrix, and Inception, you’d have eXistenZ.

I was a bit nervous about seeing this one, given David Cronenberg’s infamy for gross-out material, but eXistenZ is surprisingly measured in the body horror department (even the “Chinese Restaurant” scene didn’t really bother me, although whether or not a lot of this stuff upsets you comes down to individual tastes and fears).

The movie takes a hard look at the concept of virtual reality, and, while it may not be an action movie, it feels appropriately dream-like (without question one of the movie’s strongest aspects).  There’s also some commentary on videogames which gamers past and present will understand and appreciate.

Performance-wise, Jennifer Jason Leigh and Jude Law put in solid shifts, but I think I find the supporting roles more interesting (Ian Holm and definitely Willem Dafoe in particular).

Overall, eXistenZ may feel somewhat dated, give that it’s a late-90s vision of the future, but the way it questions our ability to unplug from the machine is as relevant now as ever.  Kudos to David Cronenberg for that.

Rating: ★★★½

 

Red Mob aka Chtoby vyzhit (1993)

Information on this movie is sketchy at best, but if you understand Russian, you can enjoy the whole film on YouTube.

The boys at Vinegar Syndrome are putting together a Blu-ray release of Red Mob and I can’t wait for it to go on sale.  It’s not on the same level of hidden gem as, say, Ninja Busters, but it is the right mix of incomprehensible and funny-bad that makes for a “magnum opus” of low-budget cinema (not to mention lots of guns and explosions).

I’m not going to bother to explain the plot, given that it took me until about forty minutes into the film to figure out who everyone was and what was going on, but I can tell you that it involves the Russian Mafia (obviously), weapons smuggling, former Soviet soldiers, kidnapping, and, if you can hold out til the end, some of the best helicopter flying I’ve ever seen committed to film.

One thing I know for sure about Red Mob is that it was shot in the former Soviet Union, maybe a couple of years after the Berlin Wall came down, and it makes use of a fairly wide variety of locations.  The only one I recognized outright is what I assume to be Moscow, but I’m guessing they also filmed quite a bit in one or more of the Central Asian states.

Anyway, like I said, I can’t wait for the Blu-ray release.  Definitely a bonkers kind of movie to be enjoyed with a group of friends.

Rating: ★★★½

(Update 05/26/17 – The Blu-ray is finally on sale: https://vinegarsyndrome.com/shop/red-mob-ltd/)

 

The Lost Boys (1987)

Before True Blood or Twilight or even Buffy the Vampire Slayer, there was The Lost Boys.

I can’t say with absolute certainty if it’s the first ever presentation of contemporary teenage vampires, but it seems to get the most credit as such.  Regardless, it’s years ahead of its time from that standpoint

And yet, it’s also very much of its own time, not just in terms of music and fashion and all that (not to mention the first ever pairing of “The Two Coreys”), but because, for whatever reason, the 1980s were the heyday of the horror comedy (Gremlins and Ghost Busters come to mind), although there has been something of a resurgence of such films in the 2000s, but we’re not talking about that, we’re talking about Joel Schumacher’s The Lost Boys.

He takes a lot of crap for Batman & Robin, which is fair (at least he owns up to it and doesn’t point fingers elsewhere), but I disagree with the popular notion that Joel Schumacher is a “bad director.”  In addition to Lost Boys, he’s also directed Falling Down and the very much underrated 8MM. as well as other successful projects, but again, we’re not talking about those; we’re talking about The Lost Boys here.

The movie is a fairly classic type of story: a family moves to a new place and discovers things are not all as they seem  But, in addition, the look of the film still holds up pretty well (I appreciate how they handled “flying” on a budget), there’s some great set design, the cast is pretty solid all around, and, most importantly, the tone is such that you can seamlessly move between horror and comedy.

If you’ve never seen it, especially with Halloween season coming up, I definitely recommend this stylish flick.

Rating: ★★★★☆