Film Review - Rocky V (1990)

Rocky V is the fifth entry in the series and this time Rocky Balboa returns from Russia to find out his money is gone and his brain is damaged, with that he retires and reopens Mickey's old gym, but waiting for him there is a hungry young fighter named Tommy Gunn and a scrupulous Don King type promoter named George Washington Duke.

This movie, in all honesty is nothing but a complete and total disaster, everything here feels completely forced and while it wants to return to the heartfelt roots of the first two movies, heart is what's missing from this film and the Rocky series always ALWAYS works best when it has heart, personal drive and determination at its centre.

And that was in all of the previous four movies, in the first film the drive was for Rocky to escape his down and out life in the slums of Philadelphia, stand up and say "I am" with a proud standing within himself, in Rocky II it was the realisation that boxing is the only thing that gives his life meaning and that he cannot deny it any longer no matter how hard he tries, Rocky III the realisation that he's lost the "eye of the tiger" his edge and that he can only get it back from an old enemy and in Rocky IV it was doing it all for a friend.

But do we get any of that inspiration that makes those films work, no we don't, instead we get a hockey family melodrama and a pitiful attempt to close off the series which also failed even at those tasks.

In the end, skip this chapter as it's by far the worst of the series, heck even Stallone himself has since disowned this entry in the series and hey I can't blame him so points for that but again, don't watch this movie 0 out of 5.

Film Review - Rocky IV (1985)

Rocky IV is the fourth in the series starring Sylvester Stallone as Rocky, the Philadelphian Boxing Champion who this time faces off against Ivan Drago, a Russian boxer played by Dolph Lundgren, but after seeing Drago kill Apollo Creed (Carl Weathers) in the ring, the Italian Stallion wants to make this fight not only personal but also East vs. West.

You know, I actually had a lot of fun watching this movie, Stallone and the regulars are good as always but what struck me most here is the energy, the Rocky movies have always worked best when they have that energy and personal drive at their centre and here it's on show, despite the fact it feels like one of those movies where an action taken by a central character would avoid the main events but then again you wouldn't have a movie if that had actually happened now would you.

But hey, I ain't complaining about that as this was a fun and entertaining movie that was an improvement on Rocky III but not as good as Rocky II so a 3 out of 5.

Film Review - Rocky III (1982)

Rocky III is the third entry in this series and this time, a new champion emerges named Clubber Lang; the big screen debut of Mr. T but Rocky proves to be no match for him in the ring, but Apollo Creed comes calling again and tells him why he lost, he lost his edge otherwise called 'the eye of the Tiger' and he's got to get it back.

Rocky III is a more glossier picture than the first two which were more down to earth in their setting, here things seem brighter and better looking, the film is also brisker than the previous two films but the final bout here is nowhere near the brilliance of Rocky 2's final battle as it's over before it begins and Lang is not an effective villain, he's a loudmouth punk and as a result, you don't get any involvement in the payoff.

One thing I did enjoy though was the chemistry between Stallone and Weathers, the two play off each other very well but not even they can lift the film out of its overall mediocrity.

All in all, only for diehard Rocky fans, 2 out of 5.

A Look Back: Highlander and Highlander 2

Having not looked back for a while, I decided now was the time to do with the 1986 fantasy hit Highlander and it's 1991 sequel Highlander II.

Highlander starred Christopher Lambert as Connor MacLeod, who lives with his clan the Macleod's in the Scottish highlands, one day during a clan fight he receives a fatal stab wound but instead of dying he survives, banished from his home he learns from a man named Ramirez played by Sean Connery that he is immortal, destined to battle down the ages until only a few remain, where those who are left will fight for the Prize, which could spell doom if it falls into the wrong hands.

With all of that, you would expect a jumbled piece of filmmaking, right; wrong, Highlander works in every area, Australian Russel Mulcahy keeps a firm hold on the direction of the film while also bringing a strong editorial style to the piece, Lambert, Connery, Clancy Brown as the Kurgan the film's main villain and Roxanne Hart as Brenda the film's main love interest are solid here and perform very well, there's a very strong story regarding the nature of immortality, some great swordfights and of course, some kick ass songs contributed by the rock band Queen, as I said all of that adds up to a movie that simply worked.

If anything it worked a little too well for it's own good, and from here on there will be spoilers so read on at your own risk, the whole coda of the movie and the entire series is "There can be Only One" meaning that in the end, only one can remain before the Prize is given and that's exactly what happens at the end of the first movie, MacLeod kills the Kurgan and claims the Prize, meaning that there's now only one, doesn't leave a lot of room for a sequel let alone a franchise now does it.

Well, Producers William Panzer and Peter Davis decided to give it a shot, upon receiving pressure from the foreign distribution market they decided to make Highlander II, but unfortunately they failed miserably to make it work despite having a bigger budget, a big name cast with Lambert and Connery reprising their roles plus adding Virginia Madsen and Michael Ironside who were then enjoying some box office success and mainstream recognition plus Russel Mulcahy returning to the director's chair, but why did this film fail where the first film succeeded, especially with those elements listed above.

1. The Necessity of the Film Itself: My own principal reason as to why this film failed was that we didn't need it at all, the first Highlander movie ended things on the right note with there now being only one, why not leave it at that, so many sequels fail time and time again because they only exist because of the box office of the previous film demanding it and that's what happened here, the first film was a hit so the industry demanded a sequel within a certain amount of time, as a result fans don't get the sequel they deserve and the one they get makes some of them think "why did we need this movie at all".

2. The Script: The second reason H2 failed is the lack of a coherent script, because of the way the first film ended, there would have been enormous difficulty going forward on a sequel that could take place afterwards, a prequel could work easily, just show Connor in a different time period before the time of the Gathering, living under a false name like his Russell Nash identity the first film and also remembering what Ramirez taught him and fighting another immortal villain.

Interestingly enough Lambert did a movie called The Sicilian with Michael Cimino, something along those lines might have worked instead of the 25 years later story we got, even though the idea of the Shield protecting the Earth is a good one, mainly because it actually builds on what we learnt in the first film in terms of Connor and the Prize.

On top of that we also get a script that doesn't know what it wants to do with itself, trying to capture the new sci-fi setting as well as the mysticism of the first film when it should have been one or the other.

3. Revealing the Immortals Origin Story: This would be number 1 for most people but since I value a coherent script more, this is number 3 instead, in the first Highlander we knew nothing about how people became Immortal and it made for some interesting intrigue, this time around their origins are revealed as aliens from the planet Zeist, which was enough to make every Highlander fan seeing the film for the first time have a sour taste in their mouth, again a story idea that simply didn't work.

4. The Return of Ramirez: In one of the first film's most dramatic and exciting moments, Ramirez and the Kurgan face off, resulting in Ramirez being carved up 3 ways to Tuesday and losing his head, here through the Quickening, he's magically brought back to life and for no genuine purpose, even though Connery does a nice job and gives the film it's only source of comedy that works.

5. The Use of the Queen Songs: Again an insult to fans of the first film was the use of that films songs by Queen, both A Kind of Magic and Who Wants to Live Forever can be heard on the film's soundtrack and again it serves no purpose but to make you remember the first Highlander movie and how good that was, way to go guys, it's bad enough this sequel was insulting to begin with.

I could go on and I probably have for some people but you know, I'm a big fan of Highlander and I wanted to cover it in this kind of way, as for me the success of Highlander 1 led to the failure of Highlander 2 as all that film was to sum it up was pointless, incoherent and insulting to the fans who enjoyed Highlander 1 and yearned for a sequel despite the fact that we didn't really need one at all, perhaps in the end, There should have Been Only One.

Film Review - Last Action Hero (1993)

Last Action Hero stars Arnold Schwarzenegger as Jack Slater, a fictional action hero who is idolised by a young boy named Danny Madigan played by Austin O'Brien, but when a magic ticket catapults him into the movie, life gets a whole lot interesting.

I had heard terrible things about this film, and was expecting a bomb, but the combination of director John McTiernan who directed Die Hard and cinematographer Dean Semler who was also the cinematographer on Mad Max 2, both of which I would rank as the finest action movies of all time was too good to resist.

But did such a dream team create a winning result, sadly not, for this reason, and that is the film has no idea what it wants to do with itself, whether it be a silly comedy, a straight up action picture or a satire about Hollywood action movies, it tries to do all three at once when it should have done one or two of those and run with that instead.

If you want this kind of film, go get 2007's Hot Fuzz, it does it FAR FAR better, mainly because Edgar Wright has a firm handle on Action and Comedy, here McTiernan is good at the action but hopeless at comedy, so despite a few good laughs here and there, skip this one, 1 and a half out of 5.

Film Review - The Hurt Locker (2009)

The Hurt Locker concerns a squad of US Bomb Disposal Soldiers in Iraq who are winding down their tour of duty, but when their CO is killed in a bomb explosion, they get a new one who is a little addicted to his job.

This movie is a tough film to review as it plays on the emotions of the audience watching it; some scenes drip with heart stopping tension which gets to a point where you can't watch the events on screen as you're waiting for the bomb to go off and blow everyone to kingdom come, but while director Kathryn Bigelow does a good job with the material, the material itself borders on predictability as you can't help but think 'they're all gonna die', probably the only other saving grace of this film is Jeremy Renner as the mad CO, his scenes play totally straight and are full of conviction as a man who is totally addicted to what he does and outside of that, is a complete wreck.

But does that save the film as a whole, no it doesn't as the borderline predictability with the characters got on my nerves one too many times, so it only gets a 2 and a half out of 5.

Film Review - Percy Jackson, The Olympians and the Lightning Thief (2010)

Percy Jackson is the latest in a long line of fantasy novels headed for the big screen since the success of the Harry Potter movies and concerns the gods Zeus and Poseidon who are threatening war after Zeus's lightning bolt is stolen, and one demigod may be the key to it all.

Now, it must be said that this is not a terrible film, as there were a couple of sight gags that did make me laugh and there were some okay action sequences that didn't exactly set the world on fire but also weren't too bad either.

But this film fails on two very big points: character and structure, and I'm going to look at both points separately, in the character side of things, none of the heroes or their quest are made important enough to suck you into the plot of the film, as they go about their business in a very workman like fashion and Percy's mother is not on screen long enough to make her interesting or make you care when she's kidnapped.

And in terms of the film's structure, the events on screen move too fast for the audience to take in what they're watching and come to root for the three heroes to succeed and Hades is simply not seen enough to be a presence in the background of the film and be felt when the heroes go about their quest.

But as I said, it's not a terrible film but it's also a film that fails all three of the fundamental principles, it doesn't have a good story, interesting characters or a strong villain so as a result, it only gets a 1 out of 5.