Assault on Precinct 13 (1976)

Written and Directed by John Carpenter. Starring Austin Stoker, Darwin Joston, and Laurie Zimmer.

Bottomline: Without all the backstory that I've come to expect from movies, Assault on Precinct 13 gives you a straightforward action movie but with something to chew on later.

3/4

Assault on Precinct 13, for me, has always been on that list of movies that was pretty far down the queue. I like John Carpenter. Who doesn't like The Thing or Escape from New York or Big Trouble In Little China? I know he did a bunch of other stuff but those are the first ones that come to mind.

But in the case of Assault on Precinct 13, I hadn't heard it on too many must-see lists. I think of the posters for the 2005 remake. Which, quick side note, has Ethan Hawke, John Leguizamo, and Lawrence Fishburne which sounds like a mid-2000s cast if I ever heard one. Anyway, long story short, it never really made the cut. 

I happened to turn it on cause it was a slow day at work and I thought I'd have it on in the background and, I'm glad I did.

The IMDB description reads: "A Highway Patrol Officer, two criminals and a station secretary defend a defunct Los Angeles precinct office against a siege by a bloodthirsty street gang." That's pretty much what you're going to get with this one. We're introduced to the characters efficiently - the Officer jumps into his car and gets on the radio. We quickly learn that it's his first day and that he's going to be sent to the precinct office in question. Boom. Done. It's not an extended montage or sequence. When he gets to the precinct, he is told to wait for the chief. He's got time a minute or two to get a cup of coffee and in that natural amount of time, we get a couple more solid sentences of characterization. That's all we need! We're on board with this guy and whatever comes his way.

I guess this strikes a chord with me because I recently watched Borderlands and, my goodness, is there so much backstory. You don't need it! Just have a character say a simple sentence that carries weight and we're good.

The action itself, (this is an action movie after all), is pretty solid. You've got good pacing between waves of baddies. Carpenter does a great job of making their situation feel overwhelming.

A short review but I'll leave it at that. It was good. I liked it and if you're in the mood for some good action I'd recommend it.

J Leguizamo Ethan

Laurence Fishburne John Leguizamo

Tension (1949)

Directed by John Berry. Written by Allen Rivkin (screenplay), John D. Klorer (based on the story by), John Berry(uncredited). Starring Richard Basehart, Audrey Totter, and Cyd Charisse.

Bottom line: The highlight of this movie is the introduction and the over-the-top introduction to the femme fatale everything else is alright.

2/4

Tension opens with such a fun monologue by a detective in homicide. Homicide, the detective informs us, is a fancy word for muuuurder. He continues, saying that the push and pull and romance and squeeze their suspects (he does this while pulling a rubber band) until they snap (and he appropriately snaps the rubber band) and the title card swoops in. If you're in the mood for borderline cheesy film noir, this introduction sets the stage perfectly.

We then are introduced to our protagonist. Warren Quimby (Basehart) is the manager at a 24-hour pharmacy. He's been working the 12 hour night shift five days a week for the past couple of years. He's working hard, saving for a better life for himself and his wife, Claire (Totter). Quimby is busy ringing up a customer when the soda jerk comes up to him and vocalizes concern. The soda jerk doesn't like how Mrs. Quimby mistreats Mr. Quimby. His worries fall on deaf ears. Ears deafened by love! Just as Warren orders the man back to his counter, he sees that his wife has been in the diner the whole time.

A quick aside, this pharmacy is structured like a general convenience store with a drug store in the back and the diner on the side. It's all part of the pharmacy but it's not like people are hanging out at a CVS. Alright, back to the Quimbys.

Mr. Quimby stops what he's doing and goes over to greet his wife. What comes next is by far my favorite introduction to a character that I've seen in a long time. The platinum blonde hair is flipped aside as a film noir trumpet (or saxophone) starts trilling. Mrs. Quimby scowls at her husband with her sharp, mean, eyebrows. She takes a big bite of a hamburger and, with her mouth full, orders him to get her some pills. She slouches, flips through a magazine, and flirts with the employee we met earlier (her flirting is not reciprocated mind you, the "jerk" is anything but).

So, IMDB has this as a description, "a meek pharmacist creates an alternate identity under which he plans to murder the bullying liquor salesman who has become his wife's lover." With these film noir flicks it always surprises me how little a secret the plot is. There is a minor plot twist but it's like, it's less a twist and more a slight lean.

Let's cut to the chase: would I recommend Tension. If you get the Movies! channel (I get it with our little antenna), and Tension is on, I'd watch it. It's a silly b-grade film noir that works. It's a straightforward plot so you could always be doing something else while watching this. Unfortunately, the main draw is with the plot. One of the reasons I like Film Noir is because of its roots in German Expressionism and Tension lacks those elements.

I'll have to check earlier in this blog to see if I've written about it but, as a teaser, one of the things about German Expressionism is the use of lighting and sets. Harsh contrasts and sharp angles are key features. Keep that in mind next time you see a film noir. Check out all of those harsh police interrogation lights and the shadows they create. It makes it so the dialog isn't the sole engine of the movie; the images help set the stage too. Mmm mmm mmm, just thinking about it.

Alright, thanks for reading! Do you like Film Noir? I wonder after watching this B-grade stuff will change the experience of watching A-grade films like The Maltese Falcon or The Big Sleep. Oh, speaking of The Big Sleep check out the fun trailer. It's so meta.

Blondie (1938)

Directed by Frank R. Strayer. Written by  Richard Flournoy (screenplay) and Chic Young (based upon the comic strip created by). Starring Penny Singleton (Blondie), Arthur Lake (Dagwood Bumstead), Larry Simms (Baby Dumbling)

Bottom line: Do you remember Kenneth from 30 Rock? Well, if you ever wondered what a full-length movie starring him would be like, check out Blondie. 1/4

I had heard of the Blondie comic strip but I never read it. I was never much of a newspaper comic strip type of guy so I was mildly surprised to see that there was a movie (or a series of movies). 

Do you recall The Land Before Time? The first one, whew, it's a classic. That scene with the mom, ugh, it's still heart-breaking. Now, the second thing I think of when I think of The Land Before Time is the array of sequels. According to Wikipedia, there are a massive thirteen sequels! If you are interested in more of that, YouTuber Jenny Nicholson made an amusing video about them. Meanwhile, Blondie comes over and says, "Hold my beer." The Blonde series has, according to Wikipedia, "28 low-budget theatrical B-features." Yes, 28. Granted, if those movies were made today, lots of them might very well be direct-to-video releases but still.

So we spend most of the time in the film following Blondie's husband, Dagwood (Lake). I'm not sure if that's the case in the comics too. In this adventure, Blondie is trying to get Dagwood to ask for a raise so they can afford new furniture. He doesn't want to ask but he also wants to get her furniture. What a pickle!

Physical comedy, mix-ups, and what not ensues. There was really only one joke that made me laugh. So it got half a point for that and then half a point because it was so fascinatingly annoying. To think, they made twenty-eight of these!

It gave me an idea for a charity event, actually. I could stream me watching all of (or at least as many as I can) straight! More to come on this to see if it's feasible.

Pass on this unless you want to see some clips on YouTube to see if Dag reminds you of Kenneth too.

Now, reader, what do you think of that idea for a charity event? Would you watch it? Leave a comment below! Thanks for reading!

Jasper Mall (2020)

Directed by Bradford Thomason and Brett Whitcomb.

Bottom line: There are hoards of YouTube channels that look at dilapidated malls (specifically) but they tend not to have the quiet, thought-out story arcs found in Jasper Mall; for a chill movie to watch, I recommend this one. 3.5/4

Malls are closing. Why go out to these massive spaces to buy something (at probably a higher cost) than just getting it online? I certainly remember going to malls; there were two malls that I went to in Pittsburgh, PA. Actually, three. There were three malls that I went to. There was (is, at the time of writing) The Galleria. It's the "fancy mall" or "rich mall" but, for a little me, a very boring mall. There was no arcade, no videogame store. They had one of those rich kid toy stores, you know, the ones with the science toys and the super high detail plastic figurines? Next, we have South Hills Village. I think this one is solidly middle class. It's got the staples; Hallmark, Disney Store, Gamespot.

Though, a quick aside, I think it might be starting to go a little downhill. How do I know? They got rid of the Taco Bell and replaced it with a generic taco place. How could you do that to me, South Hills Village? 

Lastly, we had* Century III Mall. This one has quite the YouTube footprint. It was massive and popular but, alas, is now closed. 

Anyway! This is all to say, malls were a thing. They were fun to hang out around at least for my generation so maybe there's some nostalgia going on here. Similarly, seeing old falling apart structures can be kinda fun too; that's why there are so many YouTube videos like this.

This brings us to Jasper Mall, this is a documentary that explores the mall of the same name in Jasper Alabama over the course of a year. We have a cast of characters with whom we follow too. We have a high school couple. We have a retired man who plays dominos with his friends. We have a florist who has been at the mall for twenty-five years. Finally, we have the manager/caretaker/head security/head of marketing/head janitor/tiger king (he looks like Tiger King and he used to own a private zoo). All of the people are nice and enjoyable to watch. Their back-stories aren't the deepest nor is there much character development but, for real, that's not why we're here.

One of the great things about this documentary is that it's quiet. Sometimes, when you have one that is making an argument like Blackfish, you have more of an in-your-face structure. The interviews are juxtaposed to highlight discrepancies. Jasper Mall, however, lets the images speak for themselves. At one point, the manager is talking about his hopes to galvanize the mall. The camera lingers. You have the time to soak in his facial expression: fear, worry, and yet hope. Simple but effective.

If my memory serves me, I gave Blackfish a 4/4 because it really got me pumped up. Jasper Mall was a very pleasant, thoughtful meander through the mall but it didn't get me pumped up so I'm not going to give it a perfect score. It was something that you could very easily have on in the background (though you'd miss some of the really good shots). I'd also have appreciated a bit of a post-script; I wanted to learn what happened to the manager guy...

Although, now that I'm thinking about it, maybe that's kinda the idea. He might still be at the mall working as he has been to save it. The mall is still there, a shadow of its former self, but it remains. Nothing really changes at the mall, it just slowly fades. So maybe we can imagine the manager in a similar state. Oh, I like it. Alright, I'll bump up the score a little more.

So, in summary, with the quiet and well-thought-out cinematography alongside an interesting subject matter, I would recommend Jasper Mall.

What do you think, Reader? When was the last time you went to a mall? Thanks for reading!

Let's Make It Legal (1951)

Directed by Richard Sale. Written by F. Hugh Herbert (screenplay), I.A.L. Diamond (screenplay), Mortimer Braus (based on a story by)

Starring  Claudette Colbert (Miriam Halsworth), Macdonald Carey (Hugh Halsworth), Zachary Scott (Victor Macfarland).

Bottom line: Let's Make It Legal is a perfectly good movie to watch if it is 2:30, and you're trying to feed an infant, and it's on TV.

1.5/4

It was about 2/2:30 in the morning, and my infant son started to stir. He was hungry. It seems he eats well when people are talking or there is background noise so I flipped on the TV to find 1951's Let's Make It Legal.

I'll be honest with you, I didn't watch the entirety cause I was busy getting bottles and formula ready but, I don't think I really missed anything. Let that give you an indication of what type of movie it is. 

But, that said, let me piece together what I can parse. Mariam and her husband Hugh are getting a divorce. At the same time, an old flame of Miriam comes to town - a financer named Victor. Cue farcical comedy!

Something that surprised me about this movie is the subject matter, given it's a movie from the '50's. Heck, I didn't realize that divorce was like a thing then let alone showing it in movies. Everything else in the movie is pretty standard: the acting is good, the pacing is good, the cinematography is nothing special. 

It's an amusing, light little romp. If you are doing something and can't pay 100% attention to Let's Make It Legal, that's a-ok. I, for example, went into the kitchen to get a fresh bottle during a seemingly benign argument between Miriam and Hugh and, when I came back, the movie was over!

Did it spoil the movie? No. When I looked up the ending on Wikipedia, did it surprise me? No. I'm sure you can guess what happened.

So, in summary, I would recommend Let's Make It Legal if it's on. I don't think I would actively seek it out but, if you're flipping through the stations and you are dithering between a rerun of Star Trek and Let's Make It Legal, I'd go with the latter.

Oh, one more thing, Marylin Monroe plays a minor role in this movie. I guess I'm used to seeing her in major roles. When I saw her, I thought, huh, they totally cast that woman cause she looks like Marylin Monroe. She plays a woman who wants to marry Victor because he is rich, so, you know, a standard role.   

Thanks for reading! Do you know of any other movies that you'd recommend to have on in the background? Not because you've seen them a million times but because they are just that light? Let me know in the comments.

Alright, now, mind yourself of spoilers - I've just got one point.

I couldn't help but laugh when reading the Wikipedia summary. So we've got this whole movie with Miriam falling for Victor and hating Hugh. It turns out that twenty years prior, the last time she saw Victor, the two men played a game of craps, Hugh won. Charming, right? Naturally, Miriam is furious, especially cause it was Hugh's idea (the gambling addict, mind you) to play. According to Wikipedia:

Back home Miriam explains to Hugh that she was so angry because Victor told her that twenty years ago Hugh won her hand in a game of craps. Hugh admits this, and still has those two dice with him. He asks her to throw. It turns out the dice were loaded; they always throw three and four. Hugh admits he cheated because the stake was so high. Miriam is pleased with this explanation and they reconcile.

I couldn't but laugh; "This pleases me! Let us get married again." Oh, how simple things can be!

I suppose there is something to be said that a movie that I sleepily, half-watched got me to read about it and now write about it. Well done, Let's Make It Legal.

Pulling John (2009)

Directors: Vassiliki Khonsari, Sevan Matossian

Stars: John Brzenk, Alexy Voevoda, Travis Bagent

Bottom line: Pulling John actually got me emotionally invested in the world arm-wrestling final from 2008 so, for, about an hour-long documentary, I'd say thumbs up.

3.5/4

Now, I don't know about you but my arm-wrestling experience is, one, losing. Two, Over the Top (1987). Three, late-night espn; you know, when they just finished up the world lumberjack competition, and then they switch over the arm wrestling (either that or darts).

I don't know how Pulling John came on my radar but I have had it bookmarked for literally years. I'm glad I finally made time to watch it.

Pulling John opens with a montage outlining John Brzenk's rocket-propelled entry and subsequent domination of the world arm-wrestling competitive scene. It's fast-paced, it had interested clips; it was a great way to open the movie. But John is only part of the story. 

We have a trio of competitors. Brzenk, naturally, and two up-and-comers: Alexy Voevoda (from Russia), Travis Bagent (from West Virginia).  I was going to say from US but, man, this guy is from West Virginia. It makes me think of that scene from Edge of Tomorrow.

We jump at appropriate paces between the three stories and they are really nicely set up stories too. Brzenk has been the world's greatest arm-wrestler for the past twenty years but he's getting older. Does he have the chops to continue to compete as he once did or should he retire on top? 

Alexy Voevoda is competing for the pride of his country. He comes from a family of arm wrestlers and continues the tradition. He has crushed all the competition in Russia and wants to extend that to the rest of the world. Ultimately, he hopes to defeat the one and only Brzenk.

Back in the states, we follow Bagent who also comes from a family of arm wrestlers. He, like Voevoda, wants to defeat Brzenk and reign as the world champion arm wrestler. 

Now that we have our cast, let me touch on the rules of competitive arm wrestling, well, one part of it. We have three weight classes; Medium, Heavy Weight, and Super Heavy Weight. Cause we can't have big strong guys being "light" so "light" is just Medium. Ok, guys.... 

Now, the weight classes all compete until they have the winners. The winners of those classes then compete. Doesn't that sound weird? Brzenk's class, for example, is the 210lbs class. Bagent, on the other hand, is almost 300lbs. They have to compete with one another to crown the world champion. It's essentially the final boss from Mike Tyson's Punch-Out.

What's even crazier though, when you think about it, Brzenk has absolutely destroyed everyone for the past twenty years. Brzenk is essentially David fighting a never-ending stream of Goliaths but he's playing the same game as Goliath!

I'd recommend Pulling John. It's not the most polished documentary; it's no Somm or Blackfish but it's still a lot of fun. It has a steady pace and it really builds up the characters. And I say "characters" because each of the people in the movie, competitors, and spectators, are so unique it felt like an anime or a videogame. I loved it.

If you are looking for a light, fun documentary, I'd point you to Pulling John.

Thanks for reading! Let me know, in the comments, your thoughts on arm-wrestling!

The Witches (2020)

Director: Robert Zemeckis. Writers: Robert Zemeckis (screenplay by), Kenya Barris (screenplay by). Stars: Anne Hathaway, Octavia Spencer, Stanley Tucci.

Bottom line: With its thin plot and Anne Hathaway's rough character, I don't think I would recommend The Witches but the music had its moments.

1.5/4

Witches, the movie explains via Chris Rock narration (really it's frame narrative but it serves the same purpose), hate children. The goal of a witch is to squish children. Thus begins a story of a boy's experience with a witch.

For the bottom line, I was torn between the above and "Meh, I say, meh." There were some pleasant notes but The Witches had a couple glaring issues for me. Even for a kids' movie, the plot was pretty thin. Surely there are some examples of kids' movies with some complexity. I mean, at one point Hero Boy (Jahzir Bruno) is dropped into a dangerous situation and says, "You know [after this happened] I haven't been afraid of things anymore." I'm watching the movie again as I'm writing this and I don't think they establish that fear was his issue. He was sad because his parents were killed in a car crash but not fearful. And they didn't talk about his newfound courage either after that. It felt like it was justification for action situations in which no 8-year old could be expected to function.

Now, plot aside, Bruno's performance was perfectly good. Child actors can be iffy sometimes but he played it well. Octavia Spencer's performance as Grandma was awesome. She's is a wonderfully positive character and she is tough and supportive of Hero Boy. Heck, give me a coming of age tale with the two of them and I'd be happy. I love Stanley Tucci and it's a shame that his role in The Witches was so small. Anne Hathaway's performance as the Grand High Witch (the character as a whole too), well, squished the movie. 

We learn pretty early on that the Grand High Witch is serious business; she was hatched in an egg somewhere in like Norway - queue Hathaway's ever-changing accent. She cycles between an unintelligible growl to German to the Swedish Chef. It seems like they substituted a character for CGI to make her look like a witch, which (ha), was actually a little creepy for a kids' movie. 

The introduction of the film (witches = bad) is really the extent of witch character development. Where do they get their powers? What powers do they have? Where do they come from? Why is witch magic bad but voodoo ok? Aside from the few positive performances, there were other positive notes.  

Music was pleasant at times. As the little mice were running along, the music complemented the cute little scurrying. The graphics were also pretty fancy. A major portion of the movie was centered on CGI talking mice a la Stuart Little. If ever there was a movie to date me and my point of reference... Maybe it could be like The Chipmunks but I'm not sure because I never saw that one. Anyway, fancy graphics.

So, overall, The Witches was meh. There are some pleasant enough parts but they don't do enough to carry the movie. If you're out of Halloween movies to watch but need to see something this week, maybe, but you won't be missing out if you don't see it. I wonder how it compares to the original 1990 version. My wife and I saw part of that late at night at a hotel and we've never gone back to it.

Alright, from here on out mind yourself of some spoilers so if you happen to see The Witches already, read on!

Let's start off with a big one, the choice to not turn Hero Boy back into a boy. Hero Boy and his friends are turned into mice and they go to the grandma for help. She opens up her travel voodoo pack to try to "reverse engineer" the curse in a hotel, mind you. She isn't able to and that's that? So then they go and decide not to find another witch and get them to reverse engineer it but to turn all the witches into rats. Alright, fine, but why did they have to add the note about him having a significantly shorter lifespan? That part never occurred to me. Along with that, do we not see his friends at the end because they died of old age? That feels depressing.

On another note, I sat in on a virtual seminar about Diversity in Videogames. A couple of the speakers said that growing up, they watched Nickelodeon and the Disney Channel. They enjoyed the shows but never saw the main characters that looked like them. So with that in mind, it's cool that The Witches had a Black protagonist and family. The movie is set in the '60s in Alabama so, to be honest, I was a little worried about if they would come across any racism. They didn't which was probably a good thing for a kids' movie but that isn't to say that race wasn't a part of the movie. There were a couple things that stuck out to me; first, they decided to go to this fancy hotel because "only rich white folks go there" so they'd be safe from witches who only prey on the poor. Second, when they get to the hotel, all of the staff are Black and one expresses a brief surprise that Grandma is arriving to stay at the hotel.

Alright, that's all I've got to say about The Witches. Have you seen this movie or the original? What did you think of either?

Thanks for reading! 

Edit: As a side note, I tried installing Grammarly to help me, well, with my grammar. It has a new (to me) feature that predicts tone. It says the post is disapproving!