The Foot Fist Way (2006)

In 7 words or less: King of the Demo...Tae-Kwon-Do that is

What's it all About? Fred Simmons (McBride) runs a Tae Kwon Do school but not everything is hunky dory. His marriage is on the rocks his self confidence is shot and his martial arts hero is a turns out to be tool. 

Best bits? When Fred tries selling his car there's a good little back and forth with the prospective buyer.

Did it make you think thoughts? Sure did. I always thought I liked Danny McBride but I've discovered I'm not really a fan. Cameos in Superbad, Pineapple Express and Tropic Thunder (all rubbish films btw) all made me laugh but recent appearances in Your Highness and 30 Minutes or Less made me cringe. With this in mind I thought if I delved into his back catalogue I might find a gem and added to this I'd heard good things about Foot Fist. Sadly it was not to be. This is just a poorly made, unfunny film that has no real redeeming qualities.

'I will beat your ass little kid'

I think the film makers were going for a Napoleon Dynamite vibe with a kooky off beat lead character and not much plot. It that was the case it worked but it's now also made me question whether or not I should re-watch the aforementioned ND as maybe I'll now think that is turd as well. 

The film flip flops between Fred being an inept joke of an instructor to him being competent and worthy of his skills. Strange. Ultimately I just didn't get it. What I mean to say is, I understood what was happening on the screen but I didn't understand what the point of it all was or what the film makers were trying to achieve. 

'Your Kung Fu is weak'

Would you watch it again? No. 

Rating (out of 100%): This falls down on the main concept of what a comedy should be. It's just not funny. I give The Foot Fist Way a two-footed 32%

Worse than: Talladega Nights: The Ballard of Ricky Bobby (2006)
As good as: Beverley Hills Ninja (1997)

The Taking of Pelham 123 (2009)

In 7 words or less: Everyman Denzil defuses underground hostage heist 

What's it all About? A guy and his goons hijack a subway car and demand a cool 10 mil or they'l start offing the hostages. Yawn. Oh yeah, the head scum bag Ryder (Travolta) will only talk to train dispatcher Walter Garber (Washington).

A Chief pet hate. Movies that feature civilians with guns

Best bits? None come to mind.

Did it make you think thoughts? Within 30 seconds of this film starting I knew it was a Tony Scott flick. Slo-mo, sped-up, fast edits, blurry shots, it's all there and it's all very repetitive.

I was initially intrigued where this was going as I knew nothing of the original flick but it quickly turned into a run-of-the-mil hostage heist movie. Obviously with this being a Hollywood production it was inevitable there would be a twist and I waited patiently. I waited and waited and when the credits rolled I was still waiting. Hhmm. 

'You make a lot of films, you gotta expect some to be turd'

Among all the mudanity we get a copy of the, wildly superior, John McLean-Al Powell dynamic from Die Hard with Travs refusing to speak to anyone but Denzil who is strangely at ease chatting with the terrorist. Also, why is no one on the train scared of the guys with the guns threatening their lives? In fact everyone in the whole film exudes a sense of clam and composure. Maybe it's a New York thing.

As the film neared the end I was still struggling to understand what Travolta's ultimate plan involving stocks and shares was. I shall lump it in with, why does toast always fall butter side down? as an unexplained mystery.

'What was my plan again'

Would you watch it again? Nah

Rating (out of 100%): The main problem here is that nothing interesting happens. It is literally a paint by numbers affair. It's not a complete turkey but doesn't add anything new or exciting to the genre. I give The Taking of Pelham 123 a lacklustre 55%

Better than: Under Siege 2: Dark Territory (1995)
Worse than: Die Hard (1988)

Lincoln (2012)

In 7 words or less: Honest Abe or honest bore?

What's it all About? Can Lincoln  push through the amendment to the constitution that will make slaves free men? It's kind of a pointless question really as we all know the answer. 

Best bits? I wouldn't that there's one particular highlight but the overall package is very well produced.

Did it make you think thoughts? Let's get one thing straight, Day-Lewis is one hell of an actor and here he puts in another stellar performance. I can't say whether or not he nails the true Lincoln persona as I have zero reference point for knowing how this great historical figure actually acted but I do know he's probably already written his oscar speech.

The War Room. 'Get me those votes'

Elsewhere Tommy Lee Jones is miscast as Senator Thaddeus Stevens. I'm not sure what it is but I just can't take him seriously in that role. On the positive side, Sally Field is great as Mrs Lincoln. Fiery, powerful and a fantastic foil to the stoic single minded Mr Lincoln. 

This Gordon-Levitt guy pops up everywhere

My main beef with this film is that not much actually happens. Don't believe all those glowing 5-star reviews that you'e undoubtedly seen on the tv, the web and in print proclaiming this as the greatest thing since sliced bread for it most certainly is not (that award goes to either peanut butter or Batman). A more accurate description would be that it plays like a dry history lesson with an over abundance of talking heads which is a shame because what I really wanted was a cradle-to-croak biopic not just a snap shot section of Abe's life.

It may sound like I'm giving this a bit of a bashing but I did like it and Spielberg has crafted a compelling if not fascinating look at a key moment in American history. 

Oops, wrong film

Would you watch it again? Probably, if it was on at Christmas I would have it on in the background.

Rating (out of 100%): Two films delving into the horrid world of slavery have been released recently and this is the second best one. I give Lincoln a good but not great 72%

Better than: Amistad (1997)
Worse than: Django Unchained (2012)

Gunfight at the O.K Corral (1957)

 In 7 words or less: Wyatt & Doc shoot 'em up

What's it all About? Marshall Wyatt Earp (Lancaster) and gambler/gunslinger Doc Holiday (Douglas) are worlds apart but end up in an unlikely alliance in this 'town based' western. 

Best bits? While some hoodlums shoot up the town, Doc is sitting rock steady playing cards and telling the dealer, who is shaking and cowering, to deal the cards and get on with the game. Ice cool playa. There is also a fantastic scene in the barber's shop.

Did it make you think thoughts? There are two cracking lead performances here. It's a stand-off between bravura egos as the pair swagger and stride around every scene. Lancaster was arguably the bigger star but for the Chief, it's Douglas who steals the show. His tortured gambler is strong, resolute and stoic but hides an inner turmoil that threatens to destroy him. 

It's also important to note that this was a big budget production and it shows. Sets are lushly constructed, colours vivid and the cast is all on top form. Even a young Dennis Hopper impresses as as a gunslinger who is conflicted by doing the right thing and standing tall with his cattle rustling family. Commercially the film did very well at the box office and sent the making of B westerns into decline.

Would you watch it again? Yeah, it's a great interpretation of the classic gunfight that is well worth yout time.

'No gambling here missy'

Rating (out of 100%): I really enjoyed this. It might be about 15 minutes too long but even then I give Gunfight at the O.K Corral a rootin' tootin' 82%

Better than: Wyatt Earp (1994)
As good as: Tombstone (1993)

Force 10 from Navarone (1978)

 

In 7 words or less: A poor man's Dirty Dozen

What's it all About? The Force 10 squad led by Harrison Ford is tasked with blowing up a bridge in Yugoslavia. Tagging onto this group is Robert Shaw and his buddy Edward Fox who have a separate mission to route out a traitor and eliminate him.

'We're gonna need a bigger gun'

Best bits? There is a great scene where a captured Force 10 execute a cracking bluff to convince their German hosts that they are deserters and not on a top secret mission to cripple the Nazi war effort.

Did it make you think thoughts? This is one of those 70's ensemble cast pieces that popped up a lot in that decade. Harrison Ford, Robert Shaw, Edward Fox, Carl Weathers, Barbara Bach and Richard Kiel are all on show. Weathers appears to still be playing Apollo Creed with his, angry, shouty 'you done me wrong' Sergeant Weaver, Kiel is in Bond-villain Jaws mode except now he has a sketchy Yugoslav accent, Fox is excellent as the stiff upper lipped straight man and explosives expert Miller and Ford and Shaw display great chemistry as they repeatedly clash and unsurprisingly then buddy-up.

'Cut yourself shaving?'

Would you watch it again? Probably not. There are too many other better war movies out there.

Rating (out of 100%): A solid if not spectacular war movie that stretches on a bit too long. I give Force 10 a young-Han-Solo-outing 50%

Worse than: The Guns of Navarone (1961)
Better than: Attack Force Z (1982)

Pearl Harbour (2001)

In 7 words or less: War movie with added love story

What's it all About? Set at the start of WWII, a couple of young hotshot pilots enlist in the airforce but things turn sour when Rafe (Alfleck) volunteers to go overseas and help fight in the Battle of Britain. When news reaches the States that Rafe has been shot down, the love of his life Evelyn (Beckinsale) falls into the arms of Rafe's best friend Danny (Hartnett). Oops. After the Japanese launch a sneak attack on the Hawaiian US naval base in Pearl Harbour, America  officially enters WWII.

Best bits? The dogfights are very well done with some great sequences of aerial combat.

Did it make you think thoughts? Yeah, never listen to the Mrs. I'd never seen this before as I had heard it was rubbish but my better half (cough, cough) convinced me it would make good Sunday evening viewing. The first hour is filled with so much cheese I felt like I had enough calcium to last a lifetime. Once the action kicks in, things pick up a bit but the whole Cuba Gooding Jr shtick fees like a tacked on way to show that African Americans played their part in the war effort. Unfortunately it comes across as clumsy and hamfisted. 

Run Affleck, run

Whilst watching it struck me how similar this was to The Dark Knight. Both films have a perfect end point, the Joker/Batman showdown, and here it is the bombing of Pearl Harbour. It's a shame then that both films add on a third act that overpowers the natural ending and thus is a big anticlimax. In this case it's the B-25 bombers flying to Tokyo on a reveng mission. It's all a bit heavy on the US war effort propaganda. 'You bombed our military base you dirty foreigners. We bombed your city full of civilians. We're heroes.' Ugh.

Luckily I had my laptop on showing some American football playoff action as well as a juicy rump steak accompanied by curly fries, onion rings and some buttered peas to soften the blow of this hamfest. Top draw. 

Would you watch it again? No

Rating (out of 100%): Too long, too much schmultz, too much bad acting and script. I give Pearl Harbour a don't-waste-your-time 30%
Worse than: Top Gun (1986)
Better than: Being in WWII