Category Archives: Action

London Has Fallen-2016

London Has Fallen-2016

Director Babak Najafi

Starring Gerard Butler, Aaron Eckhart

Scott’s Review #608

Reviewed January 13, 2017

Grade: D

Save for many enjoyable, incredible London shots of mostly aerial views, London Has Fallen (2016) is a complete drivel of an experience.

The film’s attempt at being a red-blooded, patriotic film comes across as insulting and racist, with a machismo that is cringe-worthy.

The dialogue is terrible, and the “us against them” mantra has been done to death in film, mainly in the 1980s and 1990s. To quote one reviewer, “London Has Fallen is Donald Trump in film form.”

I don’t understand how the film convinced such a talented cast to appear (it must have been money), and several parts are so small (Robert Forster, Melissa Leo, Jackie Earle Haley) that they are nearly glorified extras.

The plot is painfully contrived, to say nothing of the ludicrous nature of the entire story.

To retaliate against a drone strike killing a Pakistani leader, terrorists take advantage of the death of the UK Prime Minister to assassinate several world leaders who have gravitated to London to attend funeral services.

The President of the United States (played by Aaron Eckhart) is naturally in attendance, and his murder is thwarted by top Secret Service official Mike Banning (Gerard Butler), our film’s hero.

The rest of the film involves the President and Mike running throughout London, attempting to catch the terrorists and bring them to justice while avoiding death.

The London locales are superb, but sadly, they mainly appear at the film’s beginning and end. The London Eye, the Thames River, the Underground, and various metro stations are featured.

The numerous London bridges also get some exposure.

The best part is how the film showcases London’s vastness, not just the up-close shots of historic places like Westminster Abbey or Buckingham Palace.

Undoubtedly, London is known for those gems, but the aerial views give the viewer an appreciation of all London offers.

I loved only this aspect of the film.

The supporting roles are abysmal, and given the more artistic parts they’ve received in the past; one imagines the actors cringing as they read the scripts for some of them.

I hesitate to think what possessed Leo, Forster, and Haley to accept meaningless roles save for a hefty paycheck. Each played a member of the President’s staff and was reduced mainly to reactionary shots.

As an ill-fated Secret Service Director, Angela Bassett and Radha Mitchell, as Banning’s weary-looking, pregnant wife, get more screen time but are treated to equally uninteresting roles.

Overall, the performances are forgettable. Respectable actors Butler and Eckhart merely phone in their vapid, dull lines, failing to make any of them believable.

The film never bothers with character development or anything beyond fundamental good and evil roles. Every character is either 100% good or 100% bad.

It is made crystal clear that the Americans are the good guys, and the foreigners (all Middle Eastern or Asian actors, of course) are simply the bad guys.

The motivations of the “bad guys” are never explained, and one cheesy line after another is written for the “good guys.”

During the finale, Banning professes that “we have been here for thousands of years and always will be” as he beats a lousy guy senselessly. Good grief. I’ve seen better dialogue on a network television drama.

And there is never any doubt about how the film will end. There is an American mole who has used his power to enable all of the assassinations, but when the mole is revealed, it is a character we have never seen before, so who cares?

Indeed, the film will soon be forgotten for its poor story, cliche-ridden script, and numerous stereotypes, but the fantastic London shots were inspiring and lovely.

I would have been happy with one hour and forty minutes of those.

Snakes on a Plane-2006

Snakes On A Plane-2006

Director David R. Ellis

Starring Samuel L. Jackson

Scott’s Review #607

Reviewed January 11, 2017

Grade: B

Snakes on a Plane, the surprise internet bruhaha sensation of 2006, has much to criticize.

The plot is inane, the acting way over the top, and the subject portrayed in such a dumb manner that I could see the results being horrific, but there is just something I enjoyed about the film, too, as admittedly stupid as it is.

I could not help but sit back and enjoy it.

I enjoyed the setting of an airplane- trapped at 35, 000 feet, in peril, has always enamored me (think Airport disaster films of the 1970s).

The story involves a plot to release hundreds of deadly snakes on a passenger flight, to kill a witness to a murder trial.

Of course, innocent passengers meet their dire fates as the cartoon-like characters are offed one by one, in a horror-film style.

Sadly, the film did not live up to expectations, commercially or critically, and was considered something of a dud after all the hype, but I rather enjoyed it for what it was.

Hardly high art, it entertained me.

Tropic Thunder-2008

Tropic Thunder-2008

Director Ben Stiller

Starring Ben Stiller, Robert Downey, Jr., Jack Black

Scott’s Review #593

Reviewed January 8, 2017

Grade: D-

Tropic Thunder (2008) was a ridiculous film that I found to be harsh, tedious, and very loud. Attempting to be a satire of sorts, it fails on almost every level.

The main issue was with the characters, who are abrasive and unlikable.

The only redeeming qualities are Robert Downey Jr.’s and Tom Cruise’s portrayals, though they both play idiotic characters.

The plot is something of an ode to 1979’s Apocalypse Now, in that the plot throws back to the Vietnam War.

A group of narcissistic actors is filming a Vietnam memoir on location in the jungles of Southeast Asia when they are abandoned and forced to fend for themselves amid a group of drug lords.

The film’s attempt at humor fell flat for me. It just seemed like a group of crazed guys running around the jungle acting wild, and the film held little point for me.

Cruise’s part was interesting but way too small.

Directed by, and starring Ben Stiller, who should stick to acting (if that).

How Downey, Jr. scored an Oscar nomination for this drivel is beyond me, despite his acting being one of the better efforts in the film.

Oscar Nominations: Best Supporting Actor-Robert Downey Jr.

Sherlock Holmes-2009

Sherlock Holmes-2009

Director Guy Ritchie

Starring Robert Downey, Jr., Jude Law

Scott’s Review #575

Reviewed December 31, 2016

Grade: B-

From a technical perspective. Sherlock Holmes, a 2009 attempt at revitalizing the famous detective story into something of a modern franchise for the masses, achieves a measure of success in style and editing.

The film ultimately fails in character development or story.

Traditionalist fans of the detective and his partner will undoubtedly be displeased with this film.

This film is very well made, with snappy editing, fast-paced wit, and attempts at humor, but it does not work all that well when put together as a film.

The rebirth of Sherlock Holmes was made to entice modern audiences.

Director Guy Ritchie even brings in superhero elements to Sherlock Holmes. Suddenly he can kick ass as well as solve a complex mystery, which is so far removed from the original character.

Downey Jr. and Jude Law as Sherlock Holmes and his partner Watson have some humorous moments, but the chemistry is not wholly there. It appears they are both trying too hard to create some magic where there is none.

All in all, though a well-made, entertaining two hours well spent, the story and characterization ultimately do not work.

Downey Jr. gives a great performance and shows why he is one of today’s most versatile actors, but this cannot ultimately make the entire film a success.

Oscar Nominations: Best Original Score, Best Art Direction

Clash of the Titans-2010

Clash of the Titans-2010

Director Louis Leterrier

Starring Sam Worthington

Scott’s Review #566

Reviewed December 27, 2016

Grade: B

Though I went to the theater begrudgingly to see Clash of the Titans-2010 (fantasy blockbusters are not typically my cup of tea), I have to confess to being moderately impressed by this film.

I had no real expectations other than that it is a tale loosely based on the Greek myth of Perseus.

I have heard some people compare it to the original in an unfavorable way, but I have not seen the original- released in 1981 so any comparisons are a moot point.

At one hour and fifty minutes, the film is a perfect length and does not drag.

The plot is basic and focused. Perseus (Sam Worthington)  must save the life of the beautiful Princess Andromeda, as he leads a team of warriors into battle against vicious enemies.

Some of the creatures they meet along the way are fascinating.

Clash of the Titans (2010) is not fine cinema, and the acting is not spectacular, but the effects are worth mentioning, and the look of the film is impressive.

My only real criticisms are the way Medusa is portrayed (she’s said to be ugly, but she’s really a beautiful woman with snakes on her head) and the 3-D, which was pretty much unnecessary.

This is probably an attempt by the studios to capitalize for profit.

Inception-2010

Inception-2010

Director Christopher Nolan

Starring Leonardo DiCaprio

Scott’s Review #558

Reviewed December 22, 2016

Grade: A-

Inception (2010) is the type of film that will leave you astounded, baffled, confused, bewildered, and many other adjectives. To put it more simply, this film needs to be pondered after the fact.

This is a high compliment, as it is tough to remember such a complex (in a good way!) film.

Inception is visionary and meant to be processed.

A highly intelligent film, of sorts, that will leave you thinking afterward. The story is immeasurably complex and will leave many completely confused, but you’ll go with it.

In a nutshell, it tells the story of a man who intercepts people’s subconscious minds through dreams. Different layers of their minds are revealed as the film goes along.

There are also virtual levels to each person’s mind- complex, yes.

The film reminds me quite a bit of The Matrix- but better.

The film has many twists and turns throughout and will keep the viewer both perplexed and fascinated. My only slight criticism is that the dream sequences do not feel like dreams at all but are highly stylized action sequences.

Many props have been given for being so inventive, though.

Oscar Nominations: 4 wins-Best Picture, Best Original Screenplay, Best Original Score, Best Sound Editing (won), Best Sound Mixing (won), Best Art Direction, Best Cinematography (won), Best Visual Effects (won)

Piranha 3D-2010

Piranha 3D-2010

Director Alexandre Aja

Starring Elisabeth Shue

Scott’s Review #529

70108986

Reviewed November 29, 2016

Grade: C-

2010’s Piranha 3D is a tongue-in-cheek horror comedy that saves itself from being complete drivel with a sense of humor.

Remarkably, it stars some decent talents: Richard Dreyfuss, Ving Rhames, and Elisabeth Shue.

The film is pure fluff, not high art in the least, with no message or purpose.

The film is terrible, but kind of fun at the same time. It’s camp and shouldn’t be taken seriously at all.

The plot is simplistic and standard horror fare. A school of piranhas is unleashed after an underwater earthquake, kills a fisherman, and ravages a college vacation party on a lake.

The college kids come to Lake Victoria to party and lounge on the beach, and typically are dressed precariously. They are unceremoniously ripped to shreds by the angry and hungry killer fish.

Shue and Rhames must have hit rough times and have required a paycheck to star in this. They play a Sheriff and Deputy, laughably unbelievable, as they try to protect the beach-goers from a grisly fate.

Dreyfuss plays a ridiculous and unnecessary role as the aforementioned fisherman.

On a serious (and sour) note, the objectification of women is shocking in this day and age. Haven’t we seen enough stereotypes in one lifetime?

A few cool kills and humor, but Piranha 3D (2010) is a dumb, popcorn horror film.

Salt-2010

Salt-2010

Director Phillip Noyce

Starring Angelina Jolie

Scott’s Review #522

70118402

Reviewed November 20, 2016

Grade: B+

Salt (2010) is a very good, fast-paced, political thriller starring Angelina Jolie as a woman accused of being a Russian sleeper agent who must go on the run to clear her name, all the while being chased by officials attempting to accost her.

The film offers nothing new, but seeing Jolie in a role typically played by a man (originally written for Tom Cruise) is cool and makes the film unique.

She is great in the role.

There are twists and surprises along the way that keep the viewer on edge; numerous action and car-chase scenes abound and will keep the action-flick viewer quite pleased.

It’s fast-paced and very big-budget.

On the downside, I couldn’t help but think: are they making movies about the United States vs. Russia again?

They are, but I still enjoyed it for what it was.

Oscar Nominations: Best Sound Mixing

28 Weeks Later-2007

28 Weeks Later-2007

Director Juan Carlos Fresnadillo

Starring Robert Carlyle, Rose Byrne, Jeremy Renner

Scott’s Review #513

70058018

Reviewed November 6, 2016

Grade: B-

At the time of its release, I remember 28 Weeks Later (2007) as a successful follow-up to the original 28 Days Later (2002), a clever play on the title, and as picking up events some seven months after the original.

Watching the film now, however, I see flaws, mostly in the lack of a character-driven story and the resulting traditional action-type film.

Still, the film is far from all bad.

The action begins as the audience meets a “family”, barricaded in a homey residence, attempting to resume normalcy in life by preparing and serving a delicious family dinner- almost reminiscent of Thanksgiving.

The scene is tranquil and rich in familiarity.

When a little boy pounds on the door to be let in, the terror begins, and the Rage virus is proven to be alive and well still.

The story written for 28 Weeks Later has nothing to do with the original and contains none of the original characters. Rather, a father, mother, and a young boy and girl are the family that we follow throughout the film.

Rose Byrne stars as a doctor- laughingly named Scarlet- and Jeremy Renner as a U.S. military presence, NATO having been sent in to keep order as best they can.

The opening sequence is fantastic as peacefulness turns deadly rather quickly, and the characters are in immediate peril.

In another scene, when the father and mother are alone in a laboratory and events go awry, the sequence is gory, shocking, and quite heartfelt.

These are merely moments, however, and are not quite enough to carry the film into a successful sequel.

Another positive to note, even more prevalent than in the original, are the wonderful location shots of London. From the London Eye to Big Ben to street shots of downtown London and the surrounding streets are capably done, and I loved seeing the aerial views of said city.

The conclusion at Wembley Stadium was also great. This was a treat for any London fan and gave the film a clear sense of place.

Conversely, I was not a fan of the characters in 28 Weeks Later.

Whereas, in 28 Days Later, the characters were well-drawn and compelling, rich with beauty and emotion, the same cannot be said for the sequel.

I am unclear what the purpose of Renner’s tough, no-nonsense military type was, or Byrne’s sympathetic, but pointless turn as a scientist/doctor.

Both held little appeal and gave snore-worthy performances. Or perhaps the roles were just not written well. Regardless, neither worked.

The dynamic between the father and mother did work, but the kids were not the best actors, and I found their additions pointless as well.

The last scene, a frenetic trip through a tunnel by the infected and arriving in gorgeous Paris- a shot of the Eiffel Tower as proof- is a nice touch.

With a few nice touches, cool location shots, and intense peril in a few sequences, but with limited compelling characters, 28 Weeks Later (2007) is okay, but hardly an upgrade to the original or even close to a character-driven film.

No follow-up film, while initially planned, was ever completed, at least as of this writing.

Machete-2010

Machete-2010

Director Ethan Maniquis, Robert Rodriguez

Starring Danny Trejo

Scott’s Review #501

70125125

Reviewed October 28, 2016

Grade: B

Machete (2010) is a clear, fun homage to 1970s exploitation films, directed by Robert Rodriguez (a protege of Quentin Tarantino) and heavily influenced by his mentor.

It strongly resembles a Tarantino film with its comic, over-the-top elements and violence, but it’s less compelling in the story department and lacks crisp, rich storytelling.

It tells the story of a Mexican ex-Federal agent (named Machete), played by Danny Trejo, who is involved in a plot to kill a corrupt United States Senator (played by Robert De Niro).

He attempts to flee Mexico for Texas, is shot, and spends the remainder of the film vowing revenge on his assailants.

Machete contains many celebrity cameos and is fun to watch- in a light way. The film isn’t meant to be taken seriously.

For the interested, you also get to see Lindsay Lohan topless.

The film is a fun, violent popcorn flick with a nice political message, but if you’re into these types of movies, rent Grindhouse: Planet Terror (2007), which is a better experience.

Date Night-2010

Date Night-2010

Director Shawn Levy

Starring Steve Carell, Tina Fey

Scott’s Review #481

70121501

Reviewed September 17, 2016

Grade: D+

Date Night is a perfect example of mediocrity in modern filmmaking.

We have two current comedic actors here- Steve Carell and Tina Fey- circa 2010- at the top of their game.

The filmmaker’s idea is to pair these two and make an appealing romantic comedy for the masses.

The main issue with this film is that the result is generic and quite an average offering.

The entire film is incredibly plot-driven, with no character development to speak of.

If I am being too harsh, admittedly there is nice chemistry between the two leads, but it is wasted by sloppy writing.

A couple from the New Jersey burbs, Carrell and Fey portray husband and wife, Phil and Claire Foster. Saddled with two kids and their romance reaching dullsville, Phil decides to take Claire to a ritzy Manhattan restaurant.

When they arrive, they cannot get a table, so they pretend to be another couple a get one after the other couple no-shows. This leads to a tale of mistaken identity as the other couple possesses a flash drive that a mobster (Ray Liotta) wants.

This leads to a chase through Manhattan as they try to outrun and outwit their pursuers.

Wahlberg plays a hunky client of Claire’s, always shirtless, who threatens Phil and Claire’s marriage.

Several others of the current Hollywood elite- Kristen Wiig, James Franco, Mila Kunis, and Mark Ruffalo- make small and somewhat pointless appearances. Specifically, Franco and Kunis as a stoner-type bickering couple are silly and unnecessary to the story.

Carrell and Fey are quite funny as individuals and as a duo. Date Night, though, does not capitalize on or showcase their respective talents.

The film tries too hard to come up with scenario after scenario of the two on the run and encountering one problematic situation after another.

As the plot of Date Night wears on, I notice that each situation is a matter of convenience.

Conveniently, Claire has a client in town (Wahlberg), who is a security expert. They go to him for help and, predictably, his hunkiness bothers Phil and piques Claire’s interest- though, of course, we know full well Phil and Claire will end up together- that is how these mainstream films go.

In another scene. Phil and Claire can break into an office building unnoticed, trigger the alarms, conveniently find a needed file, and escape, miraculously all before the police arrive minutes later.

Very plot-driven.

The lead actors in Date Night are appealing and even charming together, but it falls flat. Still, the inane plot makes it unappealing to watch, and the slew of stars that somebody decided would be a great addition to a lukewarm film is odd.

The roles written have little bearing on the central plot, so it was apparent why they were added.

Date Night (2010) is a film we have seen time and time again with other actors in similar roles.

The Purge: Anarchy-2014

The Purge: Anarchy-2014

Director James DeMonaco

Starring Frank Grillo

Scott’s Review #466

70299747

Reviewed August 16, 2016

Grade: B

As a fan of the original The Purge (2013), a creative, fresh modern horror film with a distinct message, I didn’t expect the sequel to match the original or be as powerful.

I was right on both counts.

As a stand-alone film, though, it is a decent flick, with almost nothing to do with the original except the same premise.

I hesitate to call The Purge: Anarchy a horror film as it contains little blood, gore, or true horror elements- it is much more of a thriller.

The premise is simple- the government-sanctioned holiday of March 21st has come around again, meaning twelve hours of sanctioned mayhem, where murder, rape, and assault are all allowed without punishment for the criminals, and no police or rescue teams are available.

The period is 2023, though I am unsure why this is relevant since nothing distinguishes the year from the current year, 2016, in the story.

Several protagonists fearfully hunker down for a night of safety in their dwellings, but circumstances force them onto the streets.

A mother and her teen daughter, a young couple, and a vigilante are the characters. Their backstories aren’t very important or relevant to the film. They form a group and bond with each other.

Whereas the original kept the audience in one house, The Purge: Anarchy does anything but.

As the group begins, the streets of Los Angeles serve as the backdrop for the action as they traverse the area, mostly deserted streets, hiding in garbage dumpsters, tunnels, and other places of refuge.

The vigilante, who is revealed to be an off-duty police officer, has the motivation, as his son was killed one year ago today, not as a result of the Purge, but by a drunk driver.

The police officer seeks revenge via the freedom the annual Purge allows him.

The film is purely plot-driven and has little character development; however, the group is mostly likable, especially the mother and daughter.

Interestingly, the filmmakers feature multiple races and ethnic groups, giving it a dose of diversity, which gets big kudos from me.

I couldn’t help but compare it to the popular television series The Walking Dead (2010-2022) at several points, as the group, brandishing weapons, keeps running into thugs and enemies of every kind as they wander the streets.

A creative twist on The Purge: Anarchy follows a group of Anti-Purgers, all Black, who have a following of people supporting them against the government’s protocol of allowing an annual purge.

It is made clear that the main victims of the purge holiday are the poor and the sick.

Correlating with this, our group finds themselves kidnapped and taken to a lavish party where wealthy folks arrange a night of champagne and hunting as the victims are lured to their deaths as the onlookers cheer and feast in celebration.

Think of an Oscar party with gruesome results.

The Purge: Anarchy (2014) is a fun, Saturday night popcorn film worth pondering. Would society succumb to a fetish such as the annual purge if the government condoned it?

Undoubtedly the film must have been influenced by the popularity of The Hunger Games (2012-2023) in tone and theme.

It is a decent film, no more, no less.

End of Watch-2012

End of Watch-2012

Director David Ayer

Starring Jake Gyllenhaal

Scott’s Review #447

70235384

Reviewed July 8, 2016

Grade: B+

End of Watch (2012) impressed me much more than I was expecting. I expected a safe, by-the-numbers buddy/action movie, since the previews promoted it as such.

It was worlds better than that and threw me for a loop, in a good way.

The film stars Jake Gyllenhaal and Michael Peña as two detectives patrolling the streets of grizzled central Los Angeles, which are riddled with drug and gang violence.

The viewer is brought along for the ride as we see a day in the life, if you will, of their cop beat.

The one knock I’ll give the film is the implausibility factor of a cop videotaping everything. This seems silly and unrealistic.

Wouldn’t he be incredibly distracted? That said, some of the filmings were amazing, including the opening sequence.

The film has a realistic grittiness, and the Los Angeles locale is very effective.

End of Watch (2012) feels painstakingly real, isn’t always happy, and the dynamic between Jake Gyllenhaal and Michael Peña is evident; their friendship feels real.

The movie feels like a day in the life of an LA cop, sparing no edgy detail, and it doesn’t gloss over the lifestyle as many cop films do.

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: Best Supporting Male-Michael Peña, Best Cinematography

Spectre-2015

Spectre-2015

Director Sam Mendes

Starring Daniel Craig

Scott’s Review #401

80056799

Reviewed May 5, 2016

Grade: B+

A modern treat for James Bond fans, Spectre (2015) is a slick, costly production sure to please die-hard lovers of the storied franchise.

It draws on a rich history and nods to recent installments, wrapping up the story arc with a fantastic villain and fast-paced, compelling storytelling.

It lacks an interesting lead Bond girl, a quality that detracts from the film and is essential a the franchise.

This is the only major flaw in an otherwise fantastic film.  In typical Bond fashion, his adventures take him to London, Rome, Mexico City, Austria, and Morocco.

Speeding along in what is now the twenty-fourth Bond film, and still feeling fresh and relevant, Spectre commences where its predecessor, Skyfall, left off, mainly hot on the heels of M’s (Judi Dench’s) shocking death.

How wonderful to see her again, albeit in a videotaped message crucial to the central plot.

The new M is a male character again and is portrayed by Ralph Fiennes.

In the film’s subplot, a new character, C, comes into play as head of the Joint Intelligence Service and deems the 00 section outdated.

The focal point is Bond avenging the former M’s death by taking down Spectre, an organization not seen in a Bond film since 1971’s Diamonds Are Forever, but which is once again a strong presence.

The opening sequence in Mexico City kicks off the film’s energy.

Fast-paced, and with an awesome helicopter chase/fight sequence, it is a long sequence that thrills. We watch, engaged, as it swirls and tumbles mid-air, while hundreds of spectators in a large outdoor square flee for safety.

The film then forays into the inevitable Bond song, “Writing’s On The Wall”, this time written and performed by Sam Smith.  This particular song has received mixed reviews, but I am fond of it.

This leaves the audience geared up for a wild adventure.

The return of the crime organization, Spectre, to the story brings a rich history and is the most interesting part. We have a rooting value since it is familiar.

Even more pleasing is the return of Bond’s arch-enemy, Ernst Stavro Blofeld, better known as “Number 1”, played by legendary actors such as Donald Pleasence, Telly Savalas, and Max Von Sydow.

In Spectre, Christoph Waltz takes over the role and a major win. Waltz, a tremendous actor, plays Blofeld slyly a wickedly, taunting yet with comedic elements.

In a compelling scene (and the first one featuring Waltz), James Bond appears, hidden, at a Spectre summit.  He recoils as he recognizes the shadowed Blofeld, realizing the detrimental repercussions this will mean.

I only hope Waltz returns in subsequent Bond films.

Let’s discuss the Bond girls in the film.

Ironically, the small role featuring the oldest Bond girl in franchise history (aged fifty and played by the gorgeous Monica Bellucci) is more compelling than the lead Bond girl, Dr. Madeleine Swann, played by Léa Seydoux.

As Lucia Sciarra, widow of the Italian crime lord, there is more chemistry between Daniel Craig and Bellucci than between Craig and Seydoux.

I would have much rather seen Sciarra as the primary focus, but she is shamefully underused, appearing in only two scenes. Seydoux seems low-energy, and I noticed zero chemistry between her and Craig.

I am not sold on the new Moneypenny either, Bond’s labored sidekick and always suggested one-sided love interest, in earlier films it used to be a fun dynamic.

She was a secretary, older, and their flirtation was charming, light, and fun. She was almost a mother figure to him.

There is no flirtation or romantic hints, as the character has been modernized to fit the twenty-first century.

Despite these misses, the film is exceptionally well-made, with loads of action. Sometimes Bond films hold up well, other times they do not.

Time will tell what fate holds for Spectre (2015), but my hunch is that it will age well.

Oscar Nominations: 1 win- Best Song, “Writing’s on the Wall” (won)

Spy-2015

Spy-2015

Director Paul Feig

Starring Melissa McCarthy

Scott’s Review #386

80027379

Reviewed March 20, 2016

Grade: C+

Spy is a 2015 comedy spy spoof starring funny lady Melissa McCarthy as a loser desk CIA analyst who is suddenly thrown into the field and assigned to rescue a missing agent she is also in love with.

Carrying the film in every way, McCarthy is funny and adds to an otherwise formulaic, by-the-numbers comedy.

Admittedly, the “action-comedy” genre isn’t my favorite, and I have seen much worse than Spy, but the premise is nice; the second half, however, sinks into the ridiculous and is loud and overly long.

McCarthy plays Susan Cooper, a frumpy 40-year-old CIA analyst with a decent job as a CIA analyst (she tracks the field agents’ cameras and warns them of impending peril). Still, the higher-ups deem her dispensable and a loser, and assign her more important duties.

She is single, overweight, and lonely, pining after her sophisticated partner Bradley Fine (Jude Law), a field agent and stylish James Bond-type.

After a mishap leaves Bradley thought dead, Susan goes undercover in France, Rome, and Budapest to solve the case without being noticed.

Spy is a film with a star who completely carries the film.

As a big fan of McCarthy and her performances in whatever she appears in (comedy or drama), I need her charisma and comic timing here.

Spy contains a few laugh-out-loud moments, especially when McCarthy is forced to take on the persona of one loser after another- a divorcee with multiple cats and a wardrobe to cringe over-throw in a 1980s perm, and got a great SNL-type moment.

The film itself reminds me of a long SNL skit. When McCarthy delivers her one-liners, they connect and amuse.

An apparent homage to spy films and James Bond, Spy feels closer to an Austin Powers film, leaning more into silliness, but not quite as over the top.

Still, the European locales add a pleasant Bond-film element. McCarthy as an apparent female James Bond is also cute.

A noticeable negative is the unnecessary two-hour running time.

With a genre of this nature, a ninety- to one-hundred-minute running time is all that is necessary, and any more than that the jokes wane, become redundant, and usually go into the ridiculous.

Another problem with Spy is the supporting characters.

A well-known cast, including Rose Byrne, Allison Janney, Jason Statham, and Bobby Cannavale; each of these actors is cast in cartoon-like, one-note roles.

Cannavale and Byrne play the villains (Sergio and Rayna) in a one-dimensional way, as evil as possible, but they may also be overacting.

This could be the director’s fault, or simply what is accepted in this genre.

Janney, as the tough-as-nails CIA director, and Statham, as the dumb, temperamental field agent, also overplay their roles.

Why are all of these characters loud, unpleasant, insulting, or all of the above?

The answer is that caricatures might allow better comedy than characters, but that is a debate for another time.

On the other hand, Miranda Hart as McCarthy’s sidekick Nancy, a very tall, awkward woman and Susan’s best friend, is great and shares equally in the comic success that McCarthy brings.

Their chemistry is evident, and it would be worth exploring as a second pairing. Unlike the other characters, I felt myself rooting for her and wished her a love interest, though 50 Cent’s romantic introduction was strange.

The plot is more or less trivial and unimportant in a film like this. Rationally, almost nothing that happens would ever occur in real life, but alas, this is the movie, so you have to suspend disbelief big time.

Spy is escapist fare at its most extreme.

A hot mess, if not for the wit and comic timing McCarthy brings, Spy (2015) has an interesting premise but delivers little beyond the silly formula that has existed for decades in film comedy.

I finished the film with mixed emotions.

The Revenant-2015

The Revenant-2015

Director Alejandro G. Iñárritu

Starring Leonardo DiCaprio

Scott’s Review #371

80064516

Reviewed January 27, 2016

Grade: A

The Revenant is a fantastic 2015 film filled with intensity, great visual camera work/direction, and the acting talents of one of modern cinema’s dynamic performers, Leonardo DiCaprio.

He shines every minute he’s on screen.

Almost all the filming takes place outdoors (the American frontier period), and it is a revenge tale, which only adds to the film’s excitement and beauty.

Set in the 1820s, the film opens by introducing us to a large party of hunters and trappers in remote Wyoming.

Right off the bat, I was struck by the picturesque scenery.

We are treated to a compelling (and bloody) battle between the trappers and a tribe of Native Americans. The Louisiana Purchase has just passed, heightening tensions between various parties and spilling blood.

The hunters are decimated, so the survivors must flee on foot, hoping to reach safety hundreds of miles away.

The main character, Glass (DiCaprio), later receives a terrible injury, and the main crux of the story develops as we embark on a tale of his desperation to survive and exact revenge on the men responsible for leaving him to die.

The film is a lesson in endurance. Glass is arguably put through almost every punishment imaginable, and we wonder what more he can endure.

The film belongs to two actors. Dicaprio, and Tom Hardy as the villainous John Fitzgerald, a hunter with a major rivalry with Glass.

The film parlays into a revenge tale between the two characters.

DiCaprio is a gem in this film; not only is he compelling from a physical standpoint, but he also looks broken, battered, and bruised, and DiCaprio gives a performance that I am fond of.

He acts non-verbally.

In one crucial scene, Glass is unable to move or speak as a violent act is committed. He is desperate yet helpless.

DiCaprio’s emotional range is astounding. The pain, hurt, and frustration are evident on his face, and we sympathize greatly.

DiCaprio delivers a powerful performance.

Tom Hardy is compelling in his own right as the scoundrel he portrays. We despise this character and all his dirty deeds, and Hardy successfully pours all his energy into this grizzled role.

Hardy, quite handsome in real life, is transformed into a partially scalped, dirty man.

His fate at the end of the film is a clever touch that makes The Revenant more than a typical run-of-the-mill western.

The infamous “bear scene” is second to none. I don’t know how they shot this compelling scene, but the result is a realism I have seldom seen in film. The scene is so prolonged and violent that you wish it would end quickly.

A surprise comes that rivals any horror film.

Directed by Alejandro G. Iñárritu, it follows a vastly different type of film (Birdman, 2014) and does a wonderful job.

The Revenant is arguably a “guy’s movie”.

It features almost no women, and the ones who do are not treated well, which is unfortunate; sadly, that was likely true of the time.

Interesting to note, though, is that Iñárritu decided to have a female victim enact revenge on her abuser in a satisfying (though squeamish moment for the male viewer.

I found The Revenant to have definite left-wing leanings.

The age-old controversy of the white man taking the Indian’s land is explored, and the film has a way of bringing this up more than once, as well as not making the Indian tribes “bad”, but rather sympathetic.

Especially since Glass marries an Indian woman and has a son with her.

Gorgeous cinematography meets a wonderful, intriguing story, peppered with brutality.

The Revenant (2015) succeeds on every level and sets an important precedent for a film about perseverance in the face of hopelessness.

Oscar Nominations: 3 wins-Best Picture, Best Director-Alejandro G. Iñárritu (won), Best Actor-Leonardo DiCaprio (won), Best Supporting Actor-Tom Hardy, Best Sound Editing, Best Sound Mixing, Best Production Design, Best Cinematography (won), Best Makeup and Hairstyling, Best Costume Design, Best Film Editing, Best Visual Effects

Jurassic World-2015

Jurassic World-2015

Director Colin Trevorrow

Starring Chris Pratt, Bryce Dallas Howard

Scott’s Review #307

Reviewed December 23, 2015

Grade: C

I expected to like Jurassic World (2015) is a film I expected to like much more than I did.

Sure, it is a summer blockbuster, popcorn flick. Based on the success of earlier franchise efforts and, if memory serves, my enjoyment of the 1993 original, Jurassic Park, I expected a fun ride.

Unfortunately, I got a formulaic escapade with uninteresting characters and mediocre writing.

The premise is standard.

A behemoth amusement park exists in Central America, on Isla Nublar, where a dinosaur theme park has run without incident for ten years.

A genetically modified dinosaur, created because a magnificent new attraction is needed, breaks loose and runs rampant.

A silly love story develops between the two leads, Owen and Claire (Chris Pratt and Bryce Dallas Howard), while two young boys (Zach and Gray) are sent by their divorcing parents to stay with their Aunt, Claire, who works as the park’s Operations Manager.

Owen is the dinosaur trainer. Predictably, “bad guys” are greedy and want to advance science at the risk of human life.

The special effects are fine, albeit completely CGI-laden, which is to be expected because the main stars are dinosaurs after all.

I expected better writing, or at least a more creative attempt at something a bit edgy.

The story was completely redundant. Where was the character development? There was none. We know very little about any of the principal characters.

One might argue that an adventure film doesn’t require this, but it’s important. We know that Claire is a workaholic and has no time for her nephews- why? What makes her tick?

Here is a slight complaint. Why kill off only extremely minor characters or villains? I could see this (and the ending) a mile away. The whole film seems forced and sloppy.

Jurassic World is also filled with clichés. Owen and Claire initially dislike each other after one unsuccessful first date.

The film tries to push the love/hate, opposites attract element, and it feels contrived. How many times have we seen this in film history?

Also, Chris Pratt is perfect as the hunky, muscular “hero saves the day” type, and Dallas Bryce Howard running through the forest in a tight tank top is not unintentional.

This isn’t to say the film is bad.

It is a decent adventure film, and the special effects are cool. I did enjoy the homage to the original 1993 version as the boys stumble upon the original visitor station complete with the 1992 jeep from the original Jurassic Park film.

I thought this was a neat little nod to history, and I love that in a franchise film, but that is it for the positives.

Yes, this film was a blockbuster smash and made oodles of money. It, however, feels forced, clichéd, and quite formulaic.

I was hoping for much more and deeper, stronger material.

Mad Max: Fury Road-2015

Mad Max: Fury Road-2015

Director George Miller

Starring Tom Hardy, Charlize Theron

Scott’s Review #287

80025919

Reviewed November 20, 2015

Grade: C-

Having almost nothing to do with the original (and far superior) 1979 version of Mad Max, the 2015 Mad Max, subtitled Fury Road (presumably for the endless car chases across the desert), looks great from a visual perspective.

Tom Hardy and Charlize Theron are charismatic; the story is nonexistent, and the film grows tedious after the initial admiration I felt for the camera work and the dreamlike vision.

Initially, and admittedly, I was quite impressed with the film- a dreamlike, glossy look makes it a fantasy that one can escape into.

However, after some time, I grew tired of the visuals, seeing it as a video game, and I noticed the lack of story, which stood out.

Sure, the thinly laid plot involved a rebel, Max Rockatansky (Tom Hardy), escaping the War Boys, where he’s been kept as a blood donor against his will, joined by Furiosa (Charlize Theron) and a group of young, beautiful women escaping a life of breeding.

The group joins forces to evade Immortan Joe, who chases them through the barren desert as they try to reach safety in the beautiful “Green Place”, a land of prosperity Furiosa remembers from childhood.

But this synopsis mirrors countless other action or adventure tales that have come and gone without leaving a mark.

Again, compared to the original, I expected more from Mad Max: Fury Road and didn’t get it.

The story fails because there is no rooting value. Since the film is a fantasy, per se, I didn’t invest much in the characters getting to the “Green Place.”

The sweltering heat of the post-apocalyptic desert gives the film a roasting, tense look, and the action is almost non-stop.

Cartoon-like characters come and go, writhing on tops of cars or simply looking sinister with sneers and evil smirks, adding little to the story. Who are they? What is their purpose other than to look menacing?

I did admire Furiosa’s character. With a buzz-cut and a bad-ass swagger, the character is no-nonsense and in control throughout the film.

Certainly an inspirational female character, she adds zest to the film, which, on the surface, seems male-dominated. A woman who can inspire and impress today is reason enough to mention.

Inexplicably, reviews for Mad Max: Fury Road were positive, and I don’t get that. My overall perspective disagrees with these findings. I don’t mean to imply that the film is “run of the mill” overall. It’s not.

There are fits and starts of creativity: the film’s glossy look is admittedly a treat and a spectacle, but, alas, without a compelling story, that only goes so far before it begins to wear thin as a production.

Little chemistry or dialogue exists between Hardy and Theron. Both are top-notch talents in their own right. Rather, grunts and facial expressions run rampant between the pair.

If the film was going for any sexual connection between the two, especially given the hot, steamy desert atmosphere, it fell flat, as I noticed none.

To admire visually, the latest Mad Max (2015) may be worth a glimmer, but as a film that delivers the full package, it’s not worth its salt.

Oscar Nominations: 6 wins-Best Picture, Best Director-George Miller, Best Sound Editing (won), Best Sound Mixing (won), Best Production Design (won), Best Cinematography, Best Makeup and Hairstyling (won), Best Costume Design (won), Best Film Editing (won), Best Visual Effects

Dawn of the Planet of the Apes-2014

Dawn of the Planet of the Apes-2014

Director Matt Reeves

Starring Andy Serkis

Scott’s Review #232

70300076

Reviewed March 29, 2015

Grade: C+

Dawn of the Planet of the Apes (2014) is a summer blockbuster hit that knocks it out of the park visually; it is magnificent to look at, with creative sets and realistic images, but the story is mediocre and predictable.

I think the filmmaker’s true intent was to focus on the look of this film, and succeeds. The film is a slightly better-than-average big-screen adventure with more style than substance.

Set in San Francisco, or what was once San Francisco, the film takes place in a futuristic world. Apes have forged a new civilization after a deadly virus has eliminated 90% of the human population.

The apes are highly intelligent and manage a happy, unified existence. Then, one day, a human is encountered and, scared, shoots an ape.

This leads to a peaceful resolution between Caesar, the leader of the apes, and the humans: they each stay in their respective territories.

However, humans need access to a dam in the apes’ area to generate electricity. Mutual distrust leads to tension, but the civilized apes and humans reach a truce.

Naturally, conflict escalates as sinister humans and apes vow revenge on each other. This leads to a war while the peaceful apes and humans strive to work things out.

A further angle of the story is the hunger for power within the ranks of the Apes, reminiscent of Lord of the Flies.

The human protagonists, Malcolm and Ellie, played by Jason Clarke and Keri Russell, are a wholesome, decent couple.

Dawn of the Planet of the Apes pales in comparison to the original 1968 masterpiece, Planet of the Apes, starring Charlton Heston. Comparing the two is unfair, since, sadly, this one has nothing to do with the original.

It is simply the same franchise tag.

However, Dawn of the Planet of the Apes is weaker than its predecessor, Rise of the Planet of the Apes (2010). We had a charismatic star, James Franco, and an interesting story.

The apes are experimented on, and their intelligence is a strong angle.

The sequel is rather one-note and leans on a machismo, us-against-them angle that isn’t unique.

The main drawback of this film is its limited scope. The characters are portrayed as a) the good and sympathetic humans, b) the evil and destructive humans, c) the good and heroic apes, or d) the evil, bad apes.

The film defines everyone for the audience, with no ambiguity or complexity in the characters. This is a bit limiting. The evil ape Koba is purely bad, and the drunken, gun-happy humans are bad.

This is not to say that Dawn of the Planet of the Apes is not enjoyable; it is. It’s a fun, entertaining flick. For what it is, the film has a message: there is a way to find peace and love between different species and types of people.

Hopefully, the audience gets that message.

Dawn of the Planet of the Apes (2014) is a summer blockbuster action/sci-fi flick many will enjoy; however, it is a plot-driven extravaganza that could have been better with more layers to the story and more shape to some of the characters.

It is worth seeing as a visual cinema treat, but scarcely more than that.

Oscar Nominations: Best Visual Effects

The Guest-2014

The Guest-2014

Director Adam Wingard

Starring Dan Stevens, Maika Monroe

Scott’s Review #220

70300664

Reviewed February 7, 2015

Grade: C-

The Guest is a 2014 thriller that can perhaps be classified under the adage “it’s so bad that it’s good,” though as I pondered writing this review, that might be a bit of a stretch.

As poor as the film is, I still enjoyed something about it.

The premise is simple. A Midwestern family, the Petersons, is suddenly visited by a veteran soldier named David, who claims to be a friend of the parents’ deceased son, Caleb.

David easily insinuates himself into their lives, and the Petersons invite him to stay a few days to rehash details about Caleb.

The family is middle-class yet struggling financially, and it consists of a mother and father, a college-aged daughter named Anna, an actress eerily resembling a young Gwen Stefani, and a bullied, timid, high school-aged son named Luke.

From the get-go, something feels off about David, but his motives remain unclear to the audience.

The film has plenty of issues.

For starters, the acting is rather poor. The most notable actors are Dan Stevens (Downton Abbey), Sheila Kelley (L.A. Law), and a collection of unknowns.

Stevens and Kelley give better performances, and I found Stevens particularly believable in a role opposite his Downton Abbey alter ego.

The rest of the cast is wooden and uncompelling.

The weakest parts of The Guest are the inane plot points and the 1980s-style soundtrack. Were the filmmakers going for a retro throwback? The film is set in present times, so this aspect remains a mystery.

The story starts interestingly. Is it a Fatal Attraction (1987) type of film? What is David’s motive? What was his relationship with the deceased Caleb? Does he intend to help or harm the family?

The reveal towards the end of the film is implausible, ridiculous, and disappointing. Without giving too much away, the government plays a major role in the film, but it does little to provoke sympathy for any of the characters, only eliciting more confusion.

The attempted (and botched) love story between David and Anna does not work. They have little chemistry, and the rooting value is not there, especially as he picks up her drunken best friend at a party.

Is the audience supposed to root for David and Anna, or is it merely a weak sub-plot to the thrill aspect of the film? I suspect the latter.

Despite all these negatives, I didn’t despise the film as it trucked along; rather, I found it more of a mess than anything else.

It is not a good film, but there is something slightly appealing about it. Some of the death scenes are well done, and the budding friendship between David and the bullied son is rather sweet.

The son is enamored with the strong, masculine David, and David, in turn, serves as a protector, humiliating the bullies who gave the kid a black eye.

The film doesn’t delve into a sexual angle, but it is a bond that is cheerful to see. It has a nice, warm element.

Another impressive point of The Guest is that it ends with a surprise that leaves room for a sequel. However, because the film didn’t achieve success, I doubt a sequel will ever see the light of day.

A poorly written, weakly acted film, The Guest (2014) has moments of interest but fails miserably as a viewing experience.

By the end, I still had no idea what the main character was motivated by, which is a huge problem.

Confusing and convoluted are the adjectives best to describe this film.

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: Best Editing

Skyfall-2012

Skyfall-2012

Director Sam Mendes

Starring Daniel Craig

Scott’s Review #136

70243459

Reviewed July 26, 2014

Grade: B+

Skyfall is the latest (and twenty-third) installment in the decades-long-running James Bond franchise (1962’s Dr. No was the first one), and this one receives major kudos from me.

When you look back at all the Bond films, they have had to adjust to keep up with the times, and Skyfall does it very successfully.

In addition, Skyfall brings a good, old-fashioned, compelling story to the table.

A former agent, Raoul Silva, beautifully portrayed by Javier Bardem, launches an attack on MI6, driven by a personal vendetta against M, played by Judi Dench.

Bardem delivers a complex, powerful villain who isn’t overly cartoonish.

He appears crazy!

James Bond, of course, must come to the rescue and save the day.

The story finally gives M. a chance to shine as the main plot revolves around her. The relationship between M. and Raoul is interesting and layered with history, which makes for a compelling story.

As with Bond films, the film uses exotic locales. This time we get Shanghai, London, Scotland, and Macau.

James Bond’s past is also explored- he grew up in Scotland. The Bond family estate is a major backdrop for the action.

The reintroduction of two famous Bond characters- Moneypenny and Q is like a breath of fresh air added to the franchise, although I was not crazy about the casting choice of Q.

Also, one minor flaw with this film is that there is no clear “Bond girl” to root for.

Skyfall (2012) provides a successful return to its Bond roots and will hopefully allow the Bond franchise to continue for many films to come.

Oscar Nominations: 2 wins-Best Original Score, Best Original Song “Skyfall” (won), Best Sound Editing (won), Best Sound Mixing, Best Cinematography

The Purge-2013

The Purge-2013

Director James DeMonaco

Starring Ethan Hawke, Lena Headey

Scott’s Review #128

70265234

Reviewed July 23, 2014

Grade: A-

On paper, the premise of The Purge (2013) is intriguing. It immediately caught my attention, and I was compelled to see it.

The government, fed up with the overwhelming crime and prison overcrowding, decides to initiate a once-a-year purge, where anything goes.

It’s like Christmas for the criminals and the insane.

All emergency and police services shut down on this night, and citizens are left to their own devices as a way to purge the violent and aggressive instincts from human systems.

An affluent family, led by a security systems genius (Ethan Hawke), nestles in their lavish home.

Of course, events go awry, and chaos ensues.

The film has suspense, thrills, frights, and a bit of humor, while raising questions of class distinction and societal inequality: Why are the wealthy better off than the poor? Do they deserve to be?

I enjoyed the setting of the wealthy, gated Los Angeles community and the eerily Stepford-wife-like atmosphere of the neighborhood, where housewives delivered casseroles and other dishes to each other for the big night.

Throughout this sunny environment, the viewer could sense a too-good-to-be-true cheerfulness and the darkness to follow, anticipated as sunset emerged.

I found this film unpredictable and edge-of-your-seat, and it delved into a home-invasion thriller that worked well.

I couldn’t predict what would happen next, and that was incredibly entertaining.

I am unsure whether some of the humor in the film was intentional; some of the kills were over the top and included one-liners, but The Purge (2013) is a crisp, fun, summer popcorn horror film.

World War Z-2013

World War Z-2013

Director Marc Forster

Starring Brad Pitt

Scott’s Review #121

70262639

Reviewed July 20, 2014

Grade: B

World War Z (2013) is the type of film that is a summer hit but will most likely be forgotten over the years.

It is a slightly above-average, enjoyable action/ zombie thriller, but not much more.

It stars Brad Pitt as a former United Nations investigator called in to save the world from a zombie pandemic. The crisis spreads simultaneously across major cities worldwide.

The film sees Pitt traversing the globe in an attempt to find a cure for the epidemic before it is too late and the zombies make the world extinct of humans.

The zombies are super zombies: they can fly and move at lightning speed, making them ultra-dangerous.

The story is implausible and plot-driven, but it doesn’t matter and works on some level. My theory for this success is that the film is fast-paced, the action starts almost immediately, and Brad Pitt is charismatic.

He is the star, and all the action centers around him.

The film contains exciting, tense scenes, including a plane crash sequence and a chase around a medical lab.

World War Z (2013) is a popcorn film meant to be sat back and enjoyed, not overanalyzed or taken too seriously.

It is a perfect summer hit.

Oldboy-2013

Oldboy-2013

Director Spike Lee

Starring Josh Brolin

Scott’s Review #97

70274810

Reviewed July 8, 2014 

Grade: B-

Oldboy (2013) is a United States remake of the original South Korean film from 2003, telling the story of a successful advertising executive named Joe Doucett, played wonderfully by Josh Brolin.

He is mysteriously kidnapped and kept prisoner in a private one-room facility, where he is served the same three meals daily for twenty years, while framed for the murder of his wife.

Over the years, he keeps up with his daughter’s life through videos.

He is just as mysteriously released after twenty years and sets out to exact revenge on his former captors.

Brolin is charismatic and appealing in the lead role (kudos for his multiple nude scenes), and it is nice to see Michael Imperioli in an offbeat supporting role.

The premise is interesting, but it is the kind of film where everything is plot-driven, the villains completely manipulate events, and the film becomes implausible and, via flashbacks, reminds me of the CBS series Cold Case.

Forgetting that Brolin’s character becomes superhero-like and chiseled after twenty years in captivity, the film is a good, solid, fun thrill ride, and bloody at times.

It has aspects of a nice whodunit, a least a first.

It has so many plot holes that I lost count, but somehow it is enjoyable at the same time.

Oldboy (2013) is never boring and even unpredictable at times.

Many questions run through the viewer’s head. Who is the villain? What could the villain’s motivation be? Friend or foe?

The film is unrealistic and ludicrous at times, but also highly enjoyable.

Aliens-1986

Aliens-1986

Director James Cameron

Starring Sigourney Weaver

Scott’s Review #80

Reviewed June 29, 2014

Grade: B+

Aliens (1986) takes away the rawness of the original Alien (1979) and gives the film franchise a glossier, slicker look.

Made eight years later, the film is set fifty-seven years in the future, when Ripley, played to perfection by Sigourney Weaver, awakens.

To her horror, she discovers the aliens have colonized Earth, and she is forced to return to prevent a catastrophe. The militia is in tow, adding a masculine element that supports the film throughout.

This scenario sets the stage for what becomes an excellent sci-fi adventure story.

The special effects are wonderful and were extraordinary when the film was shot in 1986. The tunnels and spacecraft are perfectly lit and designed, creating a bright, fun setting while letting the audience know doom is lurking.

The actual aliens are visually frightening and, compared to the original, are more plentiful.

Sigourney Weaver takes center stage and leads this film successfully.

I’m not sure many other actresses could pull off her level of authentic toughness and, in the process, give off no sex appeal and still get away with it.

The only detractor is that the film feels a bit dated in a purely 1980s way. It has an 80s look, and that’s not a positive.

Not on par with the excellent original Alien, but otherwise, a well-made, supernatural thrill ride.

Oscar Nominations: 2 wins-Best Actress-Sigourney Weaver, Best Original Score, Best Sound Effects Editing (won), Best Sound, Best Art Direction, Best Film Editing, Best Visual Effects (won)

Golden Globe Nominations: Best Actress- Drama- Sigourney Weaver