Once again, folks, welcome to the end of life as we know it!
 
The realm of Science Fiction and Fantasy includes a unique subset of films that has been exciting viewers for well over a century: the Apocalypse – the collapse of civilization from war, drought, famine, virus, zombies, alien invasion, climate change, meteor strike, or even general collective apathy – explores what remains after said life-changing-event.  Storytellers have been fascinated with such days all the way back until 1916’s The End Of The World, a Danish production from director August Blom that depicted the global catastrophes resulting from a comet passing too closely near our planet.  I think it’s safe to suggest that, while horrified by the fate possibly awaiting us all, we – as viewers – still can’t look away.
 
Because the end could – quite literally – arrive at any moment, filmmakers have worked hard to introduce as many narrative variations as possible on the original idea.  In their zeal, they’ve respectfully tried to present countless Armageddons with the cinematic freshness discriminating audiences truly appreciate, occasionally even going back to Hollywood well in search of a story done earlier and elsewhere that might benefit from the whole new level of Apocalyptic flavoring.  After all, if there are only seven scripts in existence, can’t each of them become Science Fiction with the welcome addition of mutants, celestial calamities, and laser guns?
 
Today’s evidence that you can’t teach an old dog new tricks is 1991’s Neon City.  This Fantasy-fueled road trip picks up where John Ford’s 1939 Oscar-winning Western Classic – Stagecoach – left off, teleporting viewers from the days of the Wild West into the future where cowboys and lawmen of a different sort brave this new Final Frontier in search of nothing more than the chance to survive.  Brought to the screen by actor, producer, and director Monte Markham, Neon City is credited to screenwriters Buck Finch and Jeff Begun – along with contributions credited to Markham, too – and it stars Michael Ironside, Vanity, Lyle Alzado, Valerie Wildman, and Juliet Landau in key roles.
 
Saddle up, readers.  Doom is on the horizon, and the road ahead won’t be easy.
 
(NOTE: The following review will contain minor spoilers necessary solely for the discussion of plot and/or characters.  If you’re the type of reader who prefers a review entirely spoiler-free, then I’d encourage you to skip down to the last few paragraphs for the final assessment.  If, however, you’re accepting of a few modest hints at ‘things to come,’ then read on …)
​

From the film’s IMDB.com page citation:
“’Mad Max’ clone set in the not-too-distant future about a group of people trying to escape to a safe haven called Neon City after a solar disaster has decimated the Earth.”
 
If there is an Apocalypse waiting at the end of days, count me amongst the contingent voting for big and small screen tough guy Michael Ironside to lead us to the big finish.  Throughout the 1980’s and into the 1990’s, the actor either headlined or was in the cast for a good number of gritty thrillers – SciFi and beyond – and he even stood toe-to-toe opposite Hollywood heavyweight Arnold Schwarzenegger in Paul Verhoeven’s Total Recall (1990).  While Ironside might’ve lacked the charisma to outshine fellow screen talent like Bruce Willis, Sylvester Stallone, or Chuck Norris, he clearly had his own following – fans loyal to him despite the fact that he was often cast as the villain – and they definitely wished that one truly big breakout role would propel the man to some much-deserved stardom.  Though he had the right stuff, household recognition remained just out of reach.
 
But in much the same way legends endure, Ironside continued in the business; and his appearances continued to energize both viewers knowledgeable of his resume as well as newcomers only discovering what the man brought to his work.  His IMDB.com profile today shows a resume fast approaching an astonishing three hundred different professional credits, so there’s ample opportunity for those wishing to delve into his portfolio to find something they like.  (Might I suggest a visit back to Science Fiction of the 1980’s when he brought a rugged Han Solo type to the small screen aboard NBC’s original V?  He was a winning addition to that ensemble.)
 
While I’d read about Neon City, I’d never seen it; and that’s been rectified today as Kino Lorber has released an all-new 2K scan of the production for consumption.  It looks and sounds incredible for a mostly forgotten and/or overlooked smaller transport into the days of a dark tomorrow, but Ironside’s lead demonstrates why so many fans were drawn to his ability to kick ass and chew bubble gum at a time when bubble gum had gone the way of the dodo.
 
Sadly, the Markham production never quite found the right gear to propel this one into the pantheon of ‘must see’ Science Fiction and Fantasy apocalypses.  It’s good enough for what I’ve often called Saturday Night fare – the kind of forgettable flicks that used to be the mainstay of the SciFi (aka Syfy) Channel or any number of lesser pay cable channels – but the cast of supporting players who never had the kind of shelf life required to give it the necessary recognition did this film no favors.  Markham himself – a somewhat familiar face in TV fare – appears briefly; and WKRP’s Richard Sanders (faux newsman ‘Les Nessman’) is also along for the ride as a comedian eeking out a feeble existence in a mostly laughless tomorrow.  Football player turned actor Lyle Alzado appeared as ‘Bulk,’ a kinda/sorta adversary kinda/sorta sidekick to Ironside’s darkly named ‘Harry M. Stark,’ and I’d also note that the picture is credited as Alzado’s last: the NFL legend passed from brain cancer barely a year later, a consequence of steroid abuse.
 
If there’s any great inspiration aboard Neon City, then I’d argue that was whoever’s idea it was to essentially copy the highs and lows of Stagecoach … because that’s what services here as the real story.  Consider Stark and the passengers as settlers on the road to a better and brighter tomorrow – one wherein all of their troubles are truly left behind in the dust of the wasteland they’re trying to cross – and the film both works efficiently and achieves the desired results.  Anything greater?  Well, that would’ve cost more; and this was truly a no-frills expedition.
 
Frankly, City feels very much like what may’ve started out on the drawing board as a telefilm, perhaps even the pilot for a weekly series.  (I’ve done some reading online, but I’ve found no confirmation of that possibility.)  The script breezes lightly over its cast of characters much in the way many shows from the era introduced supporting players with as little baggage possible; and then it goes about the business of testing whether or not each of them has the meddle to survive in the harsh future.  (FYI: not everyone gets out of this one alive, and some of that is owed to the subplot of a – gasp! – murderer on board!)  Who knows?  Could a regular procedural featuring Stark and crew crossing a deadly border have worked in serialized format?  It certainly could’ve featured monsters of the week – as well as told any number of stories about folks hell bent on the return to normalcy Neon City promised – but, alas, it wasn’t meant to be.
 
As a wholly independent feature, City operates on its own internal combustion, mostly giving Ironside the chance to grin occasionally in between sequences of his trading blows and firing weapons.  If it truly was the Apocalypse, then one would think the survivors would want to go easy on wasting so much ammunition – they do finally run out thanks for to a convenient plot twist than anything else – but perhaps brain power will ultimately be in short supply in our last days.  Model and singer Vanity is along for the ride as a kinda/sorta fugitive from justice who is both captured and released by the disgraced lawman Stark; but the later half sees her essentially reduced to a love interest that feels a bit forced when a smarter script could’ve handled it with greater nuance.
​

Though I enjoyed the setting and the all-too-obvious inspiration of the John Ford film, City just never musters enough momentum to make it more than a one-time viewing affair.  It only occasionally tries to go full-blown Mad Max, but Markham’s staging is decidedly uninspired, and the stunt work is unimpressive.  The always impressive Juliet Landau (be still my heart!) turns in a convincing performance as the daughter of privilege just needing a ride home to her wealthy daddy; and Valerie Wildman also scores points as Stark’s former wife looking to start over once she arrives at their celebrated destination.  Fate has other designs on the lady, and – you guessed it – that inevitably brings out the worst when her ex-husband extracts a heavy price on the nefarious murderer.
 
So … would’ve I have been in the audience turning in weekly to watch Ironside do his thing had this thing somehow ended up in broadcast rotation?
 
You’re damn right I would’ve.
 
It would’ve been my goddamn pleasure.
 
Neon City (1991) was produced by Kodiak Films, Little Bear Productions, and Trimark Pictures.  DVD distribution (for this particular release) has been coordinated by the fine folks at Kino Lorber.  As for the technical specifications?  While I’m no trained video expert, I thought that the sights-and-sounds of what’s advertised to be a brand-new HD Master from a 2K scan of the 35mm interpositive to be exceptionally good; the film looks crisp – so much so that one might think it was produced today – and the audio is equally impressive.  Lastly, if you’re looking for special features?  This disc boasts an audio commentary from director Markham, an all-too-brief interview with Ironside, and the theatrical trailer.  It’s a good collection, but – as always – I’d always welcome a bit more.
 
(Mildly) Recommended.
 
Though I’m known to appreciate a good Apocalypse, I still found it hard to fawn over Neon City.  Yes, it’s occasionally interesting, technically adequate, and features the great Michael Ironside during his screen-chewing prime; but the story – a narrative imitation of 1939’s Stagecoach updated to end times – fails to fully define this world, its people, and their individual and shared circumstances.  Without that measure of depth, Markham’s feature just feels too much like a forgettable road trip; and I think true SciFi and Fantasy audiences want a bit more to chew on with their cinematic snacks.
 
In the interests of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that the fine folks at Kino Lorber provided me with a complimentary Blu-ray of Neon City (1991) by request for the expressed purposes of completing this review.  Their contribution to me in no way, shape, or form influenced my opinion of it.

​-- EZ

Folks, there was a time when movies and even some TV shows worked very, very, very hard at having their audiences not take things so seriously.
 
To give you a bit of a quick and loose history lesson, let me transport you back to the year 1977: a little road trip comedy by the name of Smokey And The Bandit revved its powerful engines around the world on the silver screen.  This seminal flick was the brainchild – in part – of writer/director Hal Needham, a Hollywood stuntman turned storyteller; and he cast hunky screen icon Burt Reynolds opposite the just blooming Sally Fields as an unlikely screen couple who ‘meet on the run’ and, together, just wish to keep on running.  Added to the mix was singer-turned-actor Jerry Reed – filling out their comically villainous trio – and their antics inspired a solid handful of sequels.  And why wouldn’t it?  It’s been reported that – on a budget of under $6 million – the immortal Bandit racked up a mind-boggling $127 million at the box office.  That’s quite the return on investment.
 
Now – having seen this original film many, many, many times (many more than I care to admit in this space) – Hollywood suits thought they could drill deeply into this possible gold mine of modern-day cowboys, Southern belles, bumbling highway patrolmen, and firing engines by following it up with one creative rip-off after another.
 
Though the silver screen incarnations never really came close to matching Smokey’s southern charm, there were a few small screen attempts worth mentioning.  1978’s B.J. And The Bear rather immediately tried to keep that trend a’truckin’, casting a young and relatively unknown Greg Evigan opposite (yes, you guessed it) a chimpanzee; and their stories saw them getting into all kinds of adventures and misadventures while transporting goods across the United States of America.  But it wasn’t ‘til 1979’s The Dukes Of Hazzard came into being that this kind of comic household hospitality came into its own on the boob tube.  Dukes pretty much dropped the trucking aspect, instead exploring the homegrown antics of two good ol’ boys and their hotter-than-blazes cousin (in signature cut-off jean shorts) just trying to escape the injustices perpetrated by some of the most incompetent ‘boys in blue’ on a weekly basis.
 
From what I can see, Dukes lasted on television until 1985 … and that, ultimately, brings me to the year of release for writer/director Phil Smoot’s Alien Outlaw.  It’s a feature film that kinda/sorta tried to take what worked best from these somewhat backwoods laughers and give them a somewhat SciFi/Fantasy spin: replacing the often incompetent and bumbling law officers with some gun-toting and apparently sex-starved aliens meant that producers thought they might be rewarded by encouraging a whole new demographic of the audience – namely, SciFi and Fantasy junkies – to embrace this particular brand of lunacy.
 
Since Outlaw has been mostly forgotten, it’s safe to say that Smoot’s efforts went largely unnoticed … but I’ll try to rectify that – albeit briefly – by giving the picture a bit of face time in the space below.
 
(NOTE: The following review will contain minor spoilers necessary solely for the discussion of plot and/or characters.  If you’re the type of reader who prefers a review entirely spoiler-free, then I’d encourage you to skip down to the last few paragraphs for the final assessment.  If, however, you’re accepting of a few modest hints at ‘things to come,’ then read on …)
​

From the film’s IMDB.com page citation:
“Aliens land in a small town where Jesse Jamison is about to have a gun show and bullets fly after the aliens start killing people.  Watch out Diamond Booking agency for your next momentous event!”
 
IMDB.com’s synopsis is accurate, but the reference to ‘Diamond Booking Agency’ is what many folks might call bit of ‘inside baseball.’  Basically, what that means is the agency’s citation directly ties into one subplot within the wider storyline, so much so that it’s almost a misdirection.  What truly matters in a creation like Alien Outlaw is the main scenario – that of the perfectly fetching Jesse Jamison (played by Kari Anderson) and her battle with the not-so-invading aliens – and anyone who tells you otherwise doesn’t know a B-Movie from a whole in the ground.
 
And make no mistake: Outlaw is a B-Movie.  In fact, it’s probably closer to a C or a D-Movie.  In some ways, viewers might even give it an F, though I’d argue that’s a bit harsh.  One man’s trash is another man’s treasure, and I got enough laughs from it to make my 90-minute investment worth my time.  (Mine’s a low bar, as they say, but that’s my lot in life, too.)
 
Still, the production is quite probably yet one more title in the explosion of diversions erupting from that great home video boom of the 1980’s.  Back in those days, anyone with a camera and a cast of willing conspirators – friends or otherwise – tried his or her hand at securing small screen success, and veteran producer Phil Smoot gave it a whirl.  (Ask your parents, kiddies, and maybe you’ll find out that they, too were even in a dirt-cheap effort.  What can I say?  Maybe even grandma needed the money!)  As its producer, this was only Smoot’s third picture; and his IMDB.com page profile shows that he’s still ‘in the business’ even today, three decades after he brought Outlaw down to Earth.
 
But because this was low budget filmmaking at a time when dollars arguably went a bit further, there’s still not a great deal of investment seen on the screen.  Outlaw was obviously spun out of a small-town cauldron, the kind of which probably didn’t even have a community theater with which to tap for acting talent.  Its locations are, rather obviously, tiny houses and/or farmhouses in the middle of nowhere; and there are no sprawling vistas tickling the fancy of its alien overlords.  Its setting is the Great American Backwoods – one with plenty of trees, a few creeks, and maybe an expansive lake for a few picturesque shots – and it was quite probably shot near and dear to where everyone lived.
 
Its story is far from extravagant but very well has the kind of elements likely found in any off-the-beaten-path township: local sharp-shooting legend Jesse is trying to shed her skin with an escape to the big leagues – hence the above mention of the Diamond Booking Agency – but when a trio of lecherous and homicidal aliens crash land in the nearby swamp, this lovely lady will gladly strap on her six guns and squeeze into the most wondrously flattering costume imaginable to defend God and country from that scourge from the stars!  In her quest to right some not-so-galactic wrongs, she’ll join forces with one hillbilly and/or redneck after another – and she’ll even risk the loss of her own (cough cough) sexual dignity – in her brassy attempt to blow these oxygen-tank-wearing Xenomorphs to Kingdom Come!
 
(Of course, I exaggerate.  So sue me.)
​

Because this is a decidedly low budget affair, there are plenty of downsides to Outlaw.  For starters, its effects are all a bit … well … laughable … and, yes, this is probably up to the point wherein they’re borderline bad in a spot or two.  Its cast include a host of unheard-of actors and actresses, so much so that this film was their first if not only screen citation.  As a consequence, there truly are no ‘big’ much less ‘noticeable’ performances in here; the conglomeration of scenes and sequences can all be graded on the scale of ‘clumsy’ to ‘passable.’  (That’s no insult intended to anyone.  The subtle truth here is that not everyone is destined to be an actor or an actress.)  It would appear that the production’s biggest claim to fame is casting screen cowboy Lash LaRue in a prominent role … and that would be impressive, indeed, if the man’s career hadn’t essentially all but dried up three decades previous.
 
Sigh.  Time can be a bitter mistress, my friends.
 
Still, what Outlaw does have is the attractive Kari Anderson.
 
Though her acting chops really leave a lot to be desired (and I do mean “a lot”), she looks damn grand in her Old West get-up.  It’s an almost comic-book inspired one-piece with Native American Indian fringe wrapped around his wonderful thighs and the cheeks of her stunning derriere.  Like any sex symbol would back in the day (before it became culturally inappropriate in pop culture), she shows plenty of leg, struts like she means it, and stands tall and proud while being an authentic woman.  To top it off, she photographs pretty damn magnificently when she’s fully dolled up and pointing the business end of her pistol at those butt ugly invaders.  Granted, those watching closely might notice that she closes her eyes every time she pulls the trigger and makes the gun go ‘boom’ – something no expert gun user would ever, ever, ever do – but my inner misogynist will always remember her best in costume and looking like she knew what the Hell she was doing and loved doing it.
 
In fact, I’m remembering her right now, and it makes me feel something special.
 
Alien Outlaw (1985) was produced by the Trian Motion-Pictures Company.  DVD distribution (for this particular release) is being coordinated by the fine folks at Kino Lorber.  As for the technical specifications?  While I’m no trained video expert, I thought that the sights-and-sounds to what’s advertised as an all-new 4K restoration from the 16mm original camera negative to be pretty darn exceptional.  (There’s a bit of grain here and there, but there’s nothing that impedes the story in any detrimental way.)  Lastly, if you’re looking for special features?  Well, on top of the fact that this is probably as good as the film has ever looked and sounded since its original release, there’s a good bit more.  The disc boasts two separate audio commentary tracks along with an in-depth featurette revisiting the production along with some archival interviews.  All-in-all, it’s an impressive collection for such an overlooked flick.
 
(Mildly) Recommended.
 
On rare occasions, it’s hard to make anything revelatory out of an older, forgettable release like Alien Outlaw (1985).  While I’ve no doubt that all involved probably had a grand time making it, the end result bobs and weaves so much around what serves loosely as a central plot that it’s just too … unfocused?  At times, it feels like it was lampooning low-budget monster movies of the bygone era; and – at other times – Smoot and company strove for a bit too much earnestness in their storytelling.  While there’s no escaping its obvious fondness for the conventional Western, I’d still insist all involved could’ve tried harder to maybe give the sharp-shootin’ Jesse Jamison one last shot at screen history.  It could’ve been somethin’ special.
 
In the interests of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that the fine folks at Kino Lorber provided me with a complimentary Blu-ray of Alien Outlaw (1985) by request for the expressed purpose of completing this review.  Their contribution to me in no way, shape, or form influenced my opinion of it.

​-- EZ

Mankind is forever wrapped up in a race to survive.
 
We’re forever wrapped in a struggle to survive the elements.  Survive the day.  Survive a job.  Survive a marriage.  Survive the weekend.  You get where this is going.  Several good film stories have captured that great race to live to see another day, but rarely does one come along with as much obvious allegory as 2013’s The Human Race.
 
Made on a budget and with very few (if any) familiar faces, it’s one more trip into The Twilight Zone where the ordinary man finds himself trapped by extraordinary circumstances which require his undivided attention … or the price of failure might very well be his head.
 
(NOTE: The following review will contain minor spoilers necessary solely for the discussion of plot and/or characters.  If you’re the type of reader who prefers a review entirely spoiler-free, then I’d encourage you to skip down to the last three paragraphs for my final assessment.  If, however, you’re accepting of a few modest hints at ‘things to come,’ then read on …)
 
From the product packaging:
“Eighty strangers from all walks of life are ripped out of their daily lives and forced to participate in a brutal race to the death.  The rules are simple; follow the arrows or you will die, step on the grass and you will die, get lapped twice and you will die.  Only one participant will survive.  Race or die.  There can be only one winner, but who will survive and for what purpose?”
 
Essentially, what you have with an inspired bit of storytelling that takes the shape of The Human is a modern-day episode of The Twilight Zone or another installment of The Outer Limits.  (FYI: A good one, at that.)  While the provided studio synopsis implies that these people are all strangers, that’s not entirely accurate: a few small groups are pulled out of reality together for this most extreme competition ever, and I suspect that’s a requirement in order to give this tale the kind of emotional grounding required of its early scenes.
 
However, the narrative as constructed by writer/director Paul Hough leaves a bit to be desired.
 
It’s a bare bones affair from start-to-finish, and this means that not a lot of time, effort, and money went into pre-production and the eventual crafting of it for the silver screen.  Right off the bat, I thought that I’d somehow picked up a foreign film (the opening narration might be French with English subtitles), so a qualifier could’ve been inserted to give audiences a proper time and place.  I say categorically that there’s nothing wrong with foreign films, people – in fact, I watch quite a few of them each week in my bid to be a widely read internet media critic – but the provided set-up didn’t need to be given in non-English especially as the rest of the ride is in that language.  As a consequence, some folks might not survive the opening sequence, turning it off as they conclude it was intended for a different audience.  (Yes, yes, and yes: we’ll call them ‘knuckleheads.’)
​

Also, it takes a bit of time to fully comprehend what’s transpiring in the film.  Yes, there is the narrative set-up, on that repeats itself a few times within the first twenty minutes (definitely a plus).  But – once more – audiences are introduced to a character who appears to perhaps be the motion picture’s leading woman, and – dare I spoil? – she doesn’t survive the opening engagement.  This shocking development might also unnerve the audience or cause some viewers to pull away from the picture.  Frankly, I usually recommend avoiding such blatantly shocking trickery unless your intent is little more than to confuse the butts sitting in their seats.  It’s a calculated risk, and I’ll leave it to each of you to decide if it was worth the expense.
 
Once it becomes clear precisely what is going on here – a city-spanning game of survival – then it’s easy to relax and enjoy the ride.  Hough’s script provides plenty of characters worth watching in here, and he necessarily keeps the emphasis on the rising tension between those who wish to understand this event versus those who simply want to survive it.  Needless to say (because of the type of picture), not everyone does survive, but if you want to know what is finally truly going on you must hang with this all the way to the very last frame.  What you learn may not be entirely original … but I thought it was definitely worth the trip.
 
Lastly, I’d be remiss in my duties as reviewer if I failed to point out that Race won ‘Best Feature Film’ at the 2013 Dragon*Con Short Film Festival.  Also, actress Trista Robinson won the ‘Best Female Performance’ from the 2013 A Night of Horror International Film Festival.  (FYI: Robinson’s work is pretty terrific.)  The film has racked up an impressive list of other accolades that you can find at IMDB.com if you’re interested.  Bravo, indeed!
 
The Human Race (2013) was produced by Paul Hough Entertainment.  DVD distribution was coordinated by the fine folks at XLRator Media.  As for the technical specifications?  This tight little indie has some very interesting cinematography but I’ll admit that the audio track could’ve used a better mix through a couple of sequences.  (FYI: it isn’t anything all that distracting; it’s just that it isn’t very inspired, either.)  If it’s special features you want, then you have a director and cast commentary to look forward to as well as some deleted scenes (nothing special) and the theatrical trailer.  A good collection!
 
Recommended.
 
Look, I’m not even going to try to convince you that The Human Race (2013) is your kind of film if you’ve seen the trailer, viewed the box art, stumbled across it in a streaming platform queue, or happened across it on the shelves of your corner video store (assuming one of those still exists where you are).  Methinks those folks are truly inspired by B-movies will know a reasonable quality B-movie when they see it, and this Race certainly fits that bill.  In fact, some of its camera work might be considered too  artsy for the average B-movie fan … but that’s exactly the kind of visual surprise I like when I’m looking for one.
 
In the interests of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that the fine folks at XLRator Media provided me with a DVD copy of The Human Race (2013) by request for the expressed purposes of completing this review.  Their contribution to me in no way, shape, or form influenced my opinion of it.

​-- EZ

Good morning, gentle readers, and welcome to Wedneday, the hump day of the week if ever there were one!

How is everyone doing this morning?  Me?  Ohh, thanks for asking.  I'm dealing with some of life's frustrations today as it would appear that our bank has totally dropped the ball.  Again.  (No, I won't tell you which one.)  It's incredible how even with all of the current top-notch technology we have out there in the world that one institution can still manage to muck up just about every possible means of commerce, you know.  Why, you'd think an industry leader would actually act and think and behave like an industry leader, but I guess that's too much to ask some days.  Sigh.

Ah, well ... off to better pursuits, am I right?!

Yesterday, I managed to squeeze in two viewings: 1986's Alien Outlaw and 1991's Neon City.  Both were a bit ... erm ... what's the word ... curious?  Watching low-budget independent fare paired up against what was likely a slightly larger budget independent fare always makes for a wondrous experience.  As a critic, I find myself wondering why the storytellers went a certain way when perhaps going a different way might've been cheaper and easier; but "to each his own," as they say.  Still, the great B-Movie steward Michael Ironside did some fabulous work back in the 1980's and 1990's; and I'll go to my grave singing this guy's praises whenever I can.  I'll be getting reviews up on both of these releases over the next few days.

​What else can I sound off about this morning?

Well, I did manage to get up a solid review (if I do say so myself) yesterday: 1983's Cujo (right here) was a bit of a sensation for me.  In my piece, I talk about the fact that I actually passed on seeing it in theaters back in the day because of a rather influential critique I'd read, so it was very interesting to finally visit the Stephen King adaptation in its glory and learn that one critic's politics were more than a bit displaced (in my humble opinion).  Though the feature is far from perfect, it's easily jumped to near the top of my list of favorite King adaptations ever, and that's saying something.  I think The Dead Zone with Christopher Walken is still a bit better.  It just resonates stronger with me.  Walken did a masterful job in it, and his work holds up even today.

But otherwise?  I think that's all I have for now.

In the meantime, might I offer the following link ...
​

As always, thanks for reading ... thanks even more for sharing ... thanks even even even more for being a fan ... and live long and prosper!

​-- EZ

Let me tell you a story: forty years ago, I had every intention of going to the local theater to see the latest Stephen King adaptation – Cujo – on the silver screen.
 
The problem was, however, I read reviews.  Back in the day, I used to read a lot of reviews.  I mean I loved reading movie reviews so much that I’d read damn near any I could get my hands on.  This was well before the days of the Information Superhighway, and that meant – pretty much – actually going to the local library in my small town and scouring the daily newspapers in supply.  It was never an easy job – it certainly meant I was going to get a lot of ink on my hands – but that’s what I did.  I hoped one day to perhaps write reviews of my own, so I studied what folks had to say about motion pictures.
 
In any event, there was this one review that I found particularly persuasive.  Granted, I was young and impressionable, so maybe I put a bit too much emphasis on one scribe’s perspective, but that’s just how my young mind was wired.  I don’t recall the outlet – I’m not sure if it was a local paper or a national one – but the writer basically used the printed page to go on an incredible rant about how Cujo and Stephen King were so obviously anti-feminist and/or anti-woman for what that dog and the author put a character through.  The gist of the argument was that – according to this critic – that only a mind that fully hated women would drag one through so many vile circumstances as a direct consequence of her being unfaithful in marriage, and then the judge called for, basically, a boycott of the film.
 
Well, as can happen from time-to-time, I think the writer allowed for his or her personal politics to get in the way of not only enjoying a contemporary Horror picture but also used his or her influence to undermine it at the box office.  Because I was so influenced by those minds who regularly spoke to me about productions, I decided to pass on seeing it at the corner theater.  Now – an incredible forty years later – I’ve finally watched Cujo in its unabashed 4K glory – and I want to correct the record.
 
(NOTE: The following review will contain minor spoilers necessary solely for the discussion of plot and/or characters.  If you’re the type of reader who prefers a review entirely spoiler-free, then I’d encourage you to skip down to the last few paragraphs for the final assessment.  If, however, you’re accepting of a few modest hints at ‘things to come,’ then read on …)
​

From the film’s IMDB.com page citation:
“Cujo, a friendly St. Bernard, contracts rabies and conducts a reign of terror on a small American town.”
 
Film – at its most basic level – is art.
 
Each of us – the audience – gets to both see and take whatever messages found present in art.  Projects speak to us in various ways.  Sometimes these efforts are intended to promote social change or serve as a ‘call to action’ for anyone watching; and, at other occasions, they’ve meant to inform a captive group on the dangers of their collective inability to do, act, or think differently.  Because art is still an individual experience between you and the artist, you do still get to cull whatever message or moral-of-the-story you wish from it.  What you glean from it may not necessarily be what the maker intended, but that’s what makes it such a personal, moving experience.
 
Forty years ago, I allowed my young mind to be influenced to avoid seeing Cujo.  Directed by Lewis Teague and adapted from the King novel by Don Carlos Dunaway and Barbara Turner, the story depicted the aftermath one massive dog who contracted rabies from a bite on its nose from a cave-dwelling bat unleashed a small town.  Understandably, audiences could very well have been aghast at the level of violence the film includes – the St. Bernard and his gnashing, bloody teeth do have their way with three grown men onscreen – but what moved one critic to denounce the feature was (cough cough) an alleged anti-female bias on the part of the author.
 
Donna Trenton (played by the luminous Dee Wallace) seemed to have an idyllic marriage.  Her husband, Vic (Daniel Hugh Kelly), is a successful tennis-playing advertising executive who’s on a string of financial successes.  She’s raising the great American child Tad (Danny Pintauro), and he’ll no doubt grow up to be at least as remarkable as his father.  She’s got a great house, a great stay-at-home career, a great body – why, what more could she possibly want?
 
Beneath the exterior of such earnest wholesomeness, it becomes clear that not everything is sunshine and roses.  Young Tad has grown overwhelmed with an obsession with monsters-in-his-closet, so the urchin ain’t exactly sleeping well at night.  Worn down by the grind of staying at the top of his game, Vic has kinda/sorta turned away from pleasing his wife.  The house – a two-story coastal palace – has grown burdensome and quiet.  Why, even Donna’s automobile has begun misbehaving, coughing and choking its way down the streets and highways.  What’s a girl to do?

As fate would have it, Donna eventually finds escape in the arms of the ‘local stud,’ Steve Kemp (Christopher Stone, Dee Wallace’s real-life husband).  While their coupling is given only passing treatment on the silver screen, it becomes increasingly clear that the lady isn’t even happy with that inappropriate relationship; but it isn’t until she calls it all off that the true terror of a rabid dog comes to life.
 
Well … as fate would have it for me, I read a review back in the day wherein one critical thinker dialed down all of Donna’s existence – at the hands of author King – to the point wherein cause-and-effect were measured in exacting variables.  The writer posited – rather successfully and persuasively, I might add – that because Donna’s troubles only began as a consequence of her straying outside her marriage – one of the last, great institutions of Western culture – that Stephen King was extracting punishment on the lady for breaking the compact with her husband.  Can you see how that worked?  Donna exchanged vows with Vic – the ‘to have and to hold’ variety, with the ‘til death do us part’ qualifier – and since she broke them the universe literally unleashed (also literally) ‘Hell on Earth’ in the guise of a rabies-afflicted St. Bernard.
 
As I stated above, each of us is allowed if not encouraged to find whatever messages we can in any form of art.  We seek out and explore such expressions with the joy of calculating how these pictures and stories move us; in some cases, it could be argued that cultures can be swayed – maybe slightly, maybe significantly – by art, such as is the case with either the myth/story of ancient Troy or even how the Charlie Hebdo cartoons in France moved a pair of brothers to commit a violent act.  Without pronouncing judgement on either of these cases, the point remains that each of us can be swayed to see the world differently; and such impressions can lead to life-altering outcomes.
 
However – now that I’m older and have experienced a great deal more of life – I think it’s safe to conclude that Donna’s infidelity – however well or poorly conceived – did not lead to her being attacked by the infected Cujo.  Her betrayal did not cause her Datsun to develop engine problems.  Her cheating – quite literally – had nothing to do with the near cataclysmic collapse of her husband’s advertising contracts.  Her duplicity – in no way, shape or form – had another woman winning a state lottery and going on a much-needed personal holiday that was also part of a series of events required for this story as plotted out by King in order for this particular set of circumstances to evolve in order for this tale to unfold as it did.
 
In fact, King was, merely, plotting the life of his created characters.
 
While I can sit back today and understand why one critic accused the popular Horror author of using his personal platform to pitch political shenanigans, my adult mind sees the world vastly differently than I did those many, many years ago.  In fact, I’d go so far as to suggest that it was the critic – in this particular set of fictional circumstances – who might be the guilty culprit shucking politics instead of Stephen King, but I do try to approach such subject matter a bit more cautious and responsibly.  He (or she) are entitled to take whatever morals wished from Cujo; and still King – whom I believe is an ardent Feminist – should be given more than a bit of wiggle room to avoid being labeled as sexist, misogynist, or chauvinist for his original story.
​

Having now digested Cujo in its full aura, I do feel a bit ashamed that I hadn’t experienced it earlier.  No, it doesn’t rank on my personal list anywhere near the cinematic heights of 1941’s Casablanca, The Maltese Falcon, or Citizen Kane (three of my all-time favorites); but – as a thriller – it’s incredibly effective.  Wallace gives an astonishingly nuanced performance as the woman caught in the middle of a disordered life now potentially ripped to shreds by a marauding behemoth of a dog; and her emotional conviction in such dark circumstances draws viewers in as the obvious tensions ebb and flow.  Pintauro manages a child’s wide-eyed consideration of circumstances – both in joy and in abject terror – with convincing detail; his moments spent screaming in fright have a level of authenticity so much so that I wouldn’t surprise to learn that perhaps the film had him requiring counseling once ‘in the can.’  And the slow and subtle transformation of Cujo itself – from the loveable ‘man’s best friend’ to the haunted and hungry beast – is about as frightening as anything ever rendered on film.  In fact, it isn’t hard to see at all how the Academy Of Science Fiction, Fantasy, And Horror Films nominated the feature in 1984 in the category of ‘Best Horror Film.’
 
Indeed, the film is one horrific descent into madness.
 
Cujo (1983) was produced by Sunn Classics Pictures and TAFT Entertainment Pictures.  DVD distribution (for this particular release) has been coordinated by the fine folks at Kino Lorber.  As for the technical specifications?  While I’m no trained video expert, I thought that the sights and sounds to this brand new HDR / Dolby Vision Master (from a 4K scan of the 35mm original camera negative) both looked and sounded fantastic.  Lastly, if you’re looking for special features?  This two-disc set is, really, fully loaded, boasting an incredible three commentaries (one of which appears to be newly produced), a roundtable with cast and crew, a making-of featurette, and loads of interviews with stars and effects crewmembers.  Seriously, you’re got everything but the kitchen sink in here, so it should keep audiences terrified for plenty of extra hours.
 
Highly recommended.
 
I’ve often said that it takes a good deal to scare me when it comes to film, and chiefly that’s because what I find truly scary is rarely what everyone else does.  But … wow.  Cujo eventually reaches nightmare intensity after its slow-building character set-ups, and – once it does – director Teague delivers something should give all of us pause.  When you think that life can’t get any worse for poor Donna Trenton, the dog shows up to take more than a bite out of crime … it’s like he wants to wrap his jaws around her very soul … and that’s terrifying.
 
In the interests of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that the fine folks at Kino Lorber provided me with a complimentary 4K Ultra HD Blu-ray of Cujo (1983) by request for the expressed purpose of completing this review.  Their contribution to me in no way, shape, or form influenced my opinion of it.

-- EZ

So far as this SciFi/Fantasy junkie is concerned, I’ll watch just about any flick that explores an iteration of our impending Apocalypse just because … well … I’d like to know how it’s all going to end.
 
Now, now, and now: don’t think that I’ve necessarily bought into the whole ‘climate change’ bunk as nothing could be further from the truth.  No, the science is not settled people – is science ever truly settled to begin with? – and there’s not this huge consensus saying that we’re collectively headed toward catastrophe.  Frankly, I’m of the opinion that you and I don’t have the ability to impact something as massively colossal as dear Mother Earth, and I think it’s almost damn silly that there are those who’ve been ”educated” to think otherwise.  Yes, I’ll concede that we should exercise a modicum of care when balancing the good, the bad, and the ugly with our planet, but thinking whether or not you shut off the light when you left the house last night – and what possible impact that’ll have on tomorrow’s temperature – is pure folly, and I’m ashamed to be a part of a generation that thinks otherwise.
 
In any event, there’s this great subgenre of Science Fiction and Fantasy that’s dealt with Extinction-Level-Events (ELEs) for quite some time – honestly, they’ve been around as long as storytellers have – and I’ve been smitten with a great number of them.  2023’s Last Sentinel – directed by Tanel Toom and written by Malachi Smyth – arguably won’t be the first nor the last to postulate that the flood levels are on-the-rise, but it does (thankfully) pretty much back-burner the ecological causes in favor of delivering what’s mostly a locked-box mystery.  Instead, the focus here is on the drama of both the global aftermath as well as the psychological struggles awaiting such survivors; and – on that front – it achieves a measure of success.
 
Sadly, it may not be all that memorable – good production qualities and reasonable performances aside – but as a momentary distraction?  A Saturday night at the movies?  Well, I’m happy to say that it works just fine so long as you don’t try to think too deeply about the villain’s mission.  If you do, then you run the risk of the whole affair getting all wet.
 
(NOTE: The following review will contain minor spoilers necessary solely for the discussion of plot and/or characters.  If you’re the type of reader who prefers a review entirely spoiler-free, then I’d encourage you to skip down to the last few paragraphs for the final assessment.  If, however, you’re accepting of a few modest hints at ‘things to come,’ then read on …)
​

From the film’s IMDB.com page citation:
“A platoon of soldiers are stranded in an abandoned military base on a near future Earth waiting for the relief or the enemy, whichever comes first.”
 
Rest assured, readers, that 1995’s seminal Waterworld was never in any danger of being unseated as the king of ApocalypseLand set at sea; and – if 2023’s Last Sentinel is any indication – no one’s really coming close to treading water alongside the Kevin Costner vehicle, even if some might find the comparison ineffectual.  Granted, these two films may have little in common in their respective foundations, but they could co-exist in some grand fabric of screen reality, though the tale of Costner’s ‘Mariner’ would most likely take place in the distant future in order for so many myths about DryLand to be truly appreciated the way a good Fantasy potboiler could.  Sentinel is set a scant 40 years after today, making it a more believable diversion for those who prefer their ‘End Times’ grounded as close to reality as possible.
 
Stripping away any veneer gained from Science Fiction, what remains in Sentinel is really more of a conventional thriller that just happens to be set at sea: a not-so-tight-knit group of soldiers have been taxed to their psychological limits when the replacement crew for their three-year-tour-of-duty aboard a floating military installation fails to show up as scheduled.  Despite sitting atop the wide, wide ocean blue, the film benefits from a heavy dose of claustrophobia – grim colors, tight spaces, etc. – as these four tortured souls have nothing better to do but follow orders and monitor an endless horizon for survivors as the war to end all wars has been lost, with Mother Nature claiming the biggest share of the casualties.  Cut off from civilization and limited to a structured and bare bones daily Morse Code exchange with command, they truly feel like the last folks alive on Planet Earth, and the strain on their reality has begun to show itself in frighteningly homicidal ways.
 
The sighting of a crewless ship adrift presents the group with a catalyst for change: was it formerly manned by their relief, and – if so – what Fate befell them on the high seas?  Were they lost in some unanticipated attack or did they somehow just merely vanish?  The mystery as presented eventually gets discarded when two of the fractured crew – Sullivan (played by Lucien Laviscount) and Baines (Martin McCann) – decide that ‘enough is enough’ and opt to commandeer the ship and abandon their posts.  When their commanding officer Hendrichs (Thomas Kretschmann) counters by eventually destroying the boat so that the potential mutineers and Cassidy (Kate Bosworth) remain on the platform, he unintentionally begins a battle of wills that only corrodes their unity further to the point wherein sanity is no longer in fashion.
 
While Sentinel works well as a conventional thriller with only a distant Fantasy backdrop (as I said above, I do so love a good Apocalypse), director Toom fails to keep his thriller afloat through both some of its quieter moments as well as its last reel twist.
​

Copying the Agatha Christie formula, the film tries rather mightily to graft a late-breaking murder mystery onto its relatively simple plot of ‘survival at all stakes,’ and the end result is more than a bit uneven.  Some of this is easily chalked up to the fact that – unlike those cerebral, cinematic whodunits – Sentinel’s cast is very small, leaving the list of the usual suspects down to but a few.  A last minute ‘secret identity’ twist spoils the formula – mostly because there’s no possible way smart viewers can either suspect or predict such an unforeseen development – so I came away feeling as though screenwriter Smyth essentially cheated in order to win the day.  Something with a bit greater depth – or, at least, some authentic suggestions as to just who in the crew might be whom – would’ve been fairer, though I’m not sure how that would’ve evolved organically.
 
Still, Sentinel operates very well on its lean and mean efficiency.  These characters maintain and shift alliances based on some seemingly natural developments over the film’s near 120-minute run-time; and the players do seem to have a good deal of fun in a world that’s already spun vastly out of control and is populated by those unfortunate few who survived the doom (but not the gloom).  Kretschmann has always been a favorite B-player of mine; and this might very well be the best I’ve seen from Bosworth in quite some time.  Classically, they’re all anti-heroes quartered away from whatever remains beyond the ocean; and none of them are disillusioned that ‘good times’ are just right around the corner.  As a consequence, they’ve embraced the grimness of their predicament, and it shows.  So, as apocalypses go, this one works well in those dark waters.
 
Last Sentinel (2023) was produced by Allfilm, Altitude Film Entertainment, BR / Arte, CrossDay Productions Ltd., Head Gear Films, and a few other participants.  (A full listing of partners – if you’re interested – is available on IMDB.com.)  A quick Google.com search suggests that the film is presently available for streaming and/or purchase from a wide variety of platforms including Prime Video, Apple TV, Tubi, Vudu, and more.  As for the technical specifications?  While I’m no trained video expert, I thought that the provided sights and sounds were very good; there are a few sequences that – rather obviously – were achieved with greenscreen technology, but that’s a small price to pay for a decent visual here and there.  Lastly, if you’re looking for special features?  As I viewed this one via streaming, there were no special features under consideration.
 
Mildly recommended.
 
Far too many films these days rely on the twist ending, and – for what that’s worth – Last Sentinel’s is just not that revelatory to make it worth the weight of its impact.  In fact, the more I think about what Smyth’s script did with an exceedingly small cast – and one secret identity – the less sense all of it made.  Asking for the audience to do a measure of the heavy lifting is okay, but the mental gymnastics required for this turn of events to make any perfect sense ought to be a crime.  While the performances work just fine, Sentinel lacked the weight necessary to keep it afloat – if that makes any sense – and this one sinks depending upon whether or not you feel you’ve been cheated in the last act.  (Tip: I felt I was, but you may feel otherwise.)
 
In the interests of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that I’m beholden to no one for my review of Last Sentinel (2023) as I watched this one via a streaming platform of which I’m a subscriber.
 
-- EZ

(NOTE: The following review will contain minor spoilers necessary solely for the discussion of plot and/or characters.  If you’re the type of reader who prefers a review entirely spoiler-free, then I’d encourage you to skip down to the last few paragraphs for the final assessment.  If, however, you’re accepting of a few modest hints at ‘things to come,’ then read on …)
 
From the film’s IMDB.com page citation:
“Disaster unfolds when a meteor strikes a small town, turning the environment uninhabitable and killing everything in the surrounding area.”
 
Sigh.
 
Look, folks, I’ll stop short of suggesting that writer/director Eddie Arya lifted the better elements of many truly inspired Science Fiction flicks, mashed them together, and did his best riff on all of them in creating Risen (2021) because I’d like to think that no legitimate one would craft a story in such a fashion.  Of course, there are those who say that there are only so many stories in the known universe, so – at some point – these separate but hardly equal features do start to resemble one another if even only superficially.  However, I can’t help but notice an astonishing number of narrative and technical similarities between quite a few, the least of which being the much-celebrated Arrival (2016).  And I say this as one who, honestly, wasn’t nearly as smitten with Arrival as were so many.  The Denis Villeneuve production is heartfelt; but its pacing leaves something to the imagination as well.
 
Setting aside these similarities can only leave regular folk scratching their heads as to why Risen was such a critical darling on the film festival circuit, scoring an impressive nine wins (as per IMDB.com) across a good handful of categories.  (Of course, I say this thinking that such information matters to most viewers, and – egads! – nothing could be further from the truth.)  At 109 minutes, Risen crawls at slower than a snail’s pace with the majority of its plotlines all revolving around a rather unconventional plot twist that comes in the last reel.  This wouldn’t feel so unfortunate if the development was better conceived, but – as it stands – Arya’s script seems to deliberately obscure the truth behind its central character mostly because smart viewers would deem such a reveal to be entirely the product of a screenwriter’s over-active imagination and hardly authentic or organic.
 
Let me try to explain further …
​

Dr. Lauren Stone (played as though chewing on a mouth full of Ambiens by Nicole Schalmo) is one of Earth’s acclaimed xenobiologists who also happens to be struggling with emotional issues out the wazoo.  (Whoever said being book smart was easy might take notice.)  Holed up in her big city apartment, she’s sulking in silence, only occasionally lifting her chin up to watch national news broadcasts.  But when a meteorite unleashes a bargain basement version of the Andromeda Strain, the military will spare no expense (it would seem) than to have her absconded and sent to the rural Pennsylvania crash site because – well – everyone in the know says that no one knows her intergalactic stuff the way Dr. Lauren Stone knows it.  Too bad this means she’ll miss her nap time, but viewers might not notice the difference.
 
Once there – and outfitted in the customary yellow containment/Hazmat suits made popular by just about any plague-riddled theatrical release – Stone displays zero technical knowledge about anything but does manage to spend a few moments on her knees caressing a red-bladed plant that’s sprung from the soil at Ground Zero.  (Did she really think this was a good idea?  Touching something in a crater known for its toxicity?  If this demonstrates Earth’s best and brightest, no wonder we’re on track to oblivion.)  Otherwise, the woman sulks and skulks about the place, and I’m left wondering what the point to all of this could possibly be except to feel like a community theater production of The Thing.
 
But before you can say “E.T., phone home,” a good portion of the dead are suddenly reanimated – into the Living Dead, it would seem – and they’ll only speak with Stone for reasons that … well … I can’t tell you that without spoiling it … so there.  Let’s just say that our lead may not be the fresh-faced and wholesome … erm … well, she’s not that, either … so let’s just say that she might have some very, very, very personal attachment to what’s transpiring on screen.  Divulging it now would spoil Arya’s attempt to tap into M. Night Shyamalan territory.
 
As I’ve tried to be expressly clear, Risen never feels anything remotely original at any point.  Borrowing rather liberally from It Came From Outer Space (1953), Invasion Of The Body Snatchers (1956), Night Of The Living Dead (1968), The Andromeda Strain (1971), Independence Day (1995), Arrival (2016), and a handful of others, it instead tries to recapture the lesser moments of greater pursuits, all the while never offering so much as a new spin or an organic on its own.  To a degree, there’s nothing wrong with such comparisons – it certainly underscores that one could very well be in ‘good company,’ as they say – but this alignment feels cheap because that’s where the similarities start and stop.  There’s no new layer – only new faces – so I found it very difficult to get excited in any way about the effort.
 
What I found a bit unforgivable was that Stone never felt like she even cared about herself … or her profession … or the greater world at large.  In fact, her character demonstrated some of the strongest antisocial behaviors I’ve ever seen in a Science Fiction and/or Fantasy film, so kudos for breaking that glass ceiling, milady.  Granted, she’s been shackled by the script with what I’m thinking all involved truly thought was a unique existential problem (can’t discuss it in any depth without spoiling it), but when the scipt’s lead is so emotionally detached from seemingly resolved if not confronting any and all dilemmas, then how is the audience supposed to invest in her?  It’s a curious miscalculation, at least, if not an act of total narrative destruction, at worst.
 
Lastly, Risen suffers from some of the worst Hollywood tendencies in that its script requires all white males to be either stupid, ineffective, or just plain evil.
​

The film is rife with scenes wherein woman and/or persons of color line up to give off-camera stares demonstrating the weight of the story while men are so obviously relegated to the background it comes outright laughable.  No, no, and no: this is not intended to be a sexist observation in any respect, but at some point it becomes important for characters to simply be characters again – to not cast them because of gender or modern morality codes.  When the personal politics of the storytellers get in the way of spinning any yarn authentically, then everyone suffers equally … so if that’s what’s intended then all I can say is good job for producing something so curiously inept except amongst your peers.  Let me know how that works out for you at the box office as trends suggest it ain’t good.
 
Risen (2021) was produced by Aryavision Pictures and Vertical Entertainment.  According to a quick Google.com search, the film is showing presently available for streaming on such platforms as Tubi, Prime Video, Vudu, or Apple TV.  As for the technical specifications?  While I’m no trained video expert, I thought that the sights and sounds to the picture were reasonably well done: some of the special effects sequences were surprisingly dated if not outright underwhelming, and I even laughed at a few of them as their quality was so jarring.  Lastly, if you’re looking for special features?  As I viewed this film via Prime Video, there were no special features under consideration.
 
Recommended only if you’re interested in a few unintended laughs or wanna see how other filmmakers might piggyback on the success of other like-minded features by creating their own iteration.
 
It’s honestly hard to give Risen (2021) an any reasonable front as it’s flawed on so many technical fronts.  While I can appreciate the attempt to bring mature elements to any alien invasion story, this one really seems to spend an inordinate amount of time with a central narrator so self-obsessed that she can’t pull herself away from her personal problems to deal with the extinction-level-event unfolding around her.  (Yes, yes, yes: without spoiling it, I do realize there’s a reason for that, but it isn’t a very good one.)  I ended up laughing in more spots than I should have, and that’s never a good thing … well, except for the endorphins.
 
In the interests of fairness, I’m pleased to disclose that I’m beholden to no one for my review of Risen (2021) as I watched this one via a streaming platform of which I’m a subscriber.

​-- EZ

Well, well, well ... good morning and HAPPY SATURDAY, gentle readers!  What a treat this is, eh?  A Saturday morning weekend post from yours truly!  How in the name of the Holy Ghost did all of you get so lucky?  You'd better go out and buy a lottery ticket, am I right?  And -- if you win -- you could always think about donating just a bit of that scratch my way?  Share in the love, remember!

Ah ... it's a great day to be a genre fan!

​Alas, there's not an awful lot of whatnot to report from the SciFiHistory.Net desk this morning, but because I was up and working on the site I thought I'd throw up (ooh, bad choice of words) a quick Daily Announcement post.  I've heard from a good handful of you how much you like them, and what can I say?  I do aim to please.  Occasionally, any way.  But I did try and commit to putting up at least a single post every day earlier this year ... well, actually what I had intended to do what get a certain number of words daily added to this space, so it kinda/sorta boils down to about the same metrics.  Anyone who is still a serious blogger will tell you that Original Content is still the king, and they only way I can do that -- what with my site's design and all -- is to add a post or two to the MainPage (i.e. the section you're reading from right now) -- so that's really all this is.

Consider that a little "inside baseball" for those of you paying close attention.

Otherwise, I do have a few flicks on tap that I'm meaning to get through this weekend.  I have an Apocalypse comedy with a review due early next week, so I'm hoping to watch that tomorrow, and I've also a small stack of new releases from a distributor that were mailed to me just this week.  That's gonna be a pretty big investment of time, so watch for new reviews on some older films real soon.  But this is also my week of heavy volunteer work (there's a speech and debate meet coming next weekend), and that's going to keep me away from the site a considerable amount of hours in the next seven days.  Consider yourselves warned.

​And, yet, here we are this morning, when all that really matters are the fine points involving November 4th?  Is there anything super-special, you ask?  Grand Master E., can you give us some of the best reasons to celebrate genre properties on this day?  Why, yes, I can!
​

Now, hear me out, haters:

John Carpenter's They Live -- which released originally on this day all the way back in 1988 -- is a film that I don't love in the same way so many Science Fiction and Fantasy fans do.  I L-I-K-E it.  I don't love it.  It's one of those films whose ideas are greater than the sum of its parts -- in, yes, my humble estimation -- and it's backed up by a few solid performances and an interesting plot.  For me, it just kinda/sorta really goes nowhere -- at least, not nearly as deep into the foundation of the subversiveness -- so I'm left with a whole lot of questions once it's over, and that's never a good thing.

However, I can certainly understand why it's message of social manipulation by an unseen force -- well, unseen without the glasses, that is -- resonates so strongly with so many.  I think there are a good many of us who believe that private players have been engaging in such nefarious behaviors for a very, very, very long time; and the Carpenter vehicle used the SciFi construct fairly wisely to pull back the layers, suggesting these hidden messages were the guilty culprit behind so much of what goes wrong in our day-to-day existence.  So, yes, it's definitely a meaty idea ... I just felt there was a helluva lotta room to go deeper.

I will say this: They Live is exactly the kind of property I'd love to see revisited -- not so much rebooted, though that's probably as accurate a possibility as there is -- maybe in an expanded limited series-style format.  Because it could go in a lot of directions, I'm not sure I'd want a fresh look at it crunched into a traditional film; give the story some freshness, show viewers the veritable labyrinth that's possible with such technology, and maybe even see if Carpenter himself would like to spearhead it all.

That could be a grand return to form.
​

Egads, good grief, people!

I can't even begin to tell you the amount of pushback I've received over the years for merely stating that I enjoy Starship Troopers.  When I even mention the film, I'm inundated with the usual suspects who only wanna cry and moan about "it isn't nearly as good as the book," and -- like William Shatner said so many years ago -- I just wanna tell them to go and get a life.  Movies rarely -- RARELY -- match up the goodness of any novel, and that's because reading a book is a vastly more CEREBRAL experience than is watching a film.  Fundamentally and functionally, they really can't quite compete with one another; so it's always safe to expect significant variations on a theme when watching any visual adaptation.  That's just the way the ball bounces.  And it always will.

Still, yes, director Paul Verhoeven CLEARLY went in a markedly different direction than the Robert Heinlein novel did with this situation and characters; and -- to a degree -- I see nothing wrong with that.  Granted, it may've been better received as a project entirely of its own, losing any association with the Heinlein book, but studios don't often work that way when it comes to Science Fiction and Fantasy.  In some cases, they've found that "adapting" (and, yes, I use that word loosely) an intellectual property gives them a stronger foothold in the marketplace; and this encourages fans of said work to come out and see what someone else has put together theatrically to celebrate a work's existence.

While I'll concede that point, I still can't help but tell you how much I enjoy Starship Troopers.  Thematically, it felt very similar to Verhoeven's other forays in our beloved realm -- RoboCop (1987) and Total Recall (1990) -- so I look on it as the conclusion to his trilogy.

Hate me all you like.  It won't change how I feel.
​

Alas, the structure of television storytelling has changed somewhat vastly over the last decade or so.  Bingeing programming has become all the rage, and the stranglehold that streaming giants like Netflix and Amazon Prime have on the marketplace will likely have that tendency continuing well into the future.

But back in the days of the serialized format, there honestly wasn't a much better genre program than TV's The Incredible Hulk.  Obviously, it was based on the Marvel Comics' property; and -- true to form -- it was understandably limited by the available technology of its day.  However, Hulk very quickly established itself as a favorite amongst viewers for sticking to the tried-and-true serialized format of giving our extremely likable hero -- Dr. David Banner (as played by the great Bill Bixby) -- a kinda/sorta 'puzzle of the week' he had to solve.  This problem would inevitable bring out the beast in him, and -- in customary fashion -- he'd have to warn those involved in the wronging to not make him angry ... because "you won't like me when I'm angry."

So, yes, it was formulaic, and audiences went in knowing full well what they would be getting in return for their hour-long investment.  Think what you will about such old-fashioned storytelling, but I can assure you -- having lived through this era -- this was appointment television for so very many of us.  It was great storytelling; and it was rewarded by being one of the more fondly-remembered shows of its day.
​

Still, I can assure you that there's more -- much more -- to love about today as it pertains to the people, places, things, films, and TV shows that make being a genre fan so mesmerizing.  And, yes, I've done the heavy lifting, listing as much as I can in the appropriate space for all to see.  That's all you really want from me, right?  Well, I give you my word that there's plenty to enjoy.

Here's the link ...
​

​As always, thanks for reading ... thanks for sharing ... thanks for being a fan ... and live long and prosper!

​-- EZ

Longtime readers of SciFiHistory.Net should well know by now, but -- if they've forgotten this single factoid about me I've mentioned countless times -- here it is again: "I grew up in a real small town in the middle of Nowhere, America."

As I've often said, we only had a handful of television stations back in my youth -- three of the major networks along with a few small market syndicated outlets -- so my entertainment choices were incredible limited.  Some might say that -- were my generation anything like today's -- we probably could've sued Hollywood and the entire entertainment industry for not providing us with enough choices, but I digress ...  The point is these tiny TV stations would end up running the same movies over and over and over again -- several times a year -- so I've lost count of the number of times I've actually seen Godzilla or any number of its early sequels.  Let's just say that I came to love the big creature because I truly had no other choice.

Still, most kids in my small town didn't watch the movie, it would seem.  They pretty much stuck to the big networks and whatever creative gibberish they had available in timeslots that catered to the youngest among us, but not yours truly.  Even as an urchin, I was all about All Things Genre, so, yeah, I was somehow okay with experiencing that lumbering giant and his destructive tendencies over and over and over again because it tickled my fancy.  I wanted to see Tokyo and parts of Japan destroyed, and Godzilla never failed me.

Why would I bring this up?

Well, it was on this day all the way back in 1954 -- in the year of our lord Toho -- that the gigantic lizard first sprang to life on screens.  Whether you know it or not, it certainly made a lasting impact on the people of Japan, and I think it's safe to suggest that other people around the world eventually caught up with what made the franchise so magical: namely that special effects don't have to be perfect, what matters most is the wondrous killing monster with a decent origins story, and film history can still be made.  Undoubtedly, the phenomenon that is Godzilla remains impactful to this day as there are other iterations all set for big and small screen exposure in the months ahead of when I'm posting this humble little blog entry.  An incredible 69 years after it first crawled up from the Earth and the oceans, the original 'Big Guy' (screw you, Joe Biden) muscles onto film to the delight of its legion of fans.

Ah ... ain't it a great day to be a genre fan?

Well, well, well ...

Certainly there's a bit more cause to celebrate the day, but take a gander at the Daily Citations Page and I think you'll see that a good number of Godzilla follow-ups also hit screens over the years on this day.  The mere fact alone that he's still marching large and tall for folks to discover and re-discover that magic brings joy to my heart.

Here's the link ...
​

As always, thank you for being a regular reader ... thanks for being a fan ... thanks for sharing my blog around the world ... and live long and prosper!

​-- EZ

Good morning, gentle readers, and welcome to Thursday, November 2nd!

You read that right, folks.  It's Thursday!  And you know what that means?  Friday -- one of the most coveted days of the week -- is lurking just right around the corner.  So here's hoping that you have something truly special on-tap this weekend so that you can successfully unwind from the stress of the work week.  God knows each of us needs a little something truly special to unwind.

Otherwise ... how's everybody been?

I got an email asking if I'd stopped doing these daily announcements, and the short answer is, obviously, no.  What with the Halloween whatnot -- and all of the post-Halloween candy sales, mind you -- I was a bit busy in a few other ways, so much so that I just didn't have that much free time yesterday, and voila!  That's what happened!  Life!  Life is what happened!  It gets in the way when we least expect it, and each of us has to find a way to right that ship when it does.  So I got up this morning with the expressed purpose of getting up today's daily announcement post in a humble attempt to get back on track.

Alas, I haven't had the opportunity to watch any films for review ... and I know some of you are always looking for my thoughts on pictures new and old.  I did receive a small stack of genre flicks the other day, so my free time will be reserved this weekend for a good deal of screenings.  I've also a flick or two via streaming that I need to get to; and this means I've got my work cut out of me over the next few days.  Sigh.  It's a life, I guess.

​But you're not here to listen to my troubles, are you?  No, no, no.  You came here expecting the hyperlink to today's (small) mountain of goodness, and I aim to please.  Here it is ...
​

As can sometimes happen, I really don't have a good degree of whatever to say about today.  There's a solid handful of interesting birthdays and film premieres -- along with a smattering of what makes television so memorable -- but nothing at this juncture stands out to me as deserving any special mention.  But that doesn't mean you shouldn't take a healthy gander as you should.  You know you want to, and I know you want you, and you know that I know you want to ... so let's just dispense with all of the pleasantries and encourage you to dig in, eh?

As always, thanks for reading ... thanks for being a fan ... thanks for sharing ... and live long and prosper!

​-- EZ