GALLOWWALKERS (2013) **

I have an affinity for horror-western hybrids.  This one certainly had promise.  I mean the prospect of a horror-western starring Wesley Snipes as a cowboy who scours the west gunning down the titular monsters, undead frontier killers who wear the skin of their victims, sounds like a good time.  

It also blatantly steals from spaghetti westerns of the past.  From the weird camera angles to the Morricone-inspired music cues, the film nicely captures that old time feel.  It looks better than your typical Direct to Video actioner, that’s for sure.

Gallowwalkers is odd, uneven, but not altogether uninteresting.  Imagine if Blade went to the Wild West and that might give you an idea of what we’re dealing with.  I’m not saying it’s nearly as good as Blade was, it’s just nice seeing Snipes in a horror setting again.  You wish he was given more to do than ride around the prairie and look grim, but at least there’s enough weirdness here to prevent it from being just another western.

Unfortunately, the mythology revolving around the gallowwalkers themselves is a bit muddy.  “No one knows why” they returned from the dead, which is a bit of a cop-out if you ask me.  At least the film is a lot gorier than expected and there’s plenty of odd moments revolving around skinning people that help to make it memorable.  (In one scene, a henchman begs the main gallowwalker to let him sew on a woman’s lips.)

All of this is more or less entertaining; at least for an hour or so.  Too bad it gets more drab and confusing as it goes along.  The needless flashbacks and clunky narration that try to hold it all together adds to the perplexing narrative.  In fact, they pulled a Steven Seagal on us as they used a guy that sounds like Snipes (but isn’t) as the narrator.  

I guess they had to do what they can.  This film was made right when Snipes was having his legal troubles.  Given the circumstances, I can’t exactly fault them for using a voice double.

The villain gets the best line of the movie when he grabs a preacher and says, “Forgive me, Lord, for I have skinned!”

WALKABOUT (1971) ***

Jenny Agutter and her little brother (Luc Roeg) are abandoned by their father in the Australian outback.  Hopelessly lost, they make their way across the harsh desert landscape.  They cross paths with an Aborigine boy (David Gulpilil) who is out on his “walkabout” (his tribal coming-of-age ritual) who teaches them how to survive in the outback.

On the surface, Walkabout is a tale of survival, but it also acts as mirror of two vastly different societies.  Director Nicolas (Performance) Roeg contrasts the life of the young city folk with that of the Aborigine teen.  When Gulpili is hunting for dinner, spearing kangaroos and lizards, Roeg deftly edits in shots of a butcher cutting up meat for a customer.

It’s a beautiful looking film with the vast landscapes seemingly going on forever.  The shots of animals roaming around and eating each other are a bit reminiscent of Mondo Cane, but Roeg’s eye is unjudgmental and uncynical.  They’re just doing what animals do.  If anything, these shots show just how out of place Agutter and her brother are.

Speaking of Agutter, she is excellent as the sister who is forced to act as mother cub to her brother.  She also spends a lot of the movie naked as a jaybird, which certainly helps.  Though Gulpilil takes notices her (and she notices him too), there is an innocence about the whole thing that makes it sweet.

Walkabout goes on a bit too long and drags in some spots.  I guess any movie that features as much walking as this one is bound to bog down somewhere.  However, it’s still worth watching for the strong performances and the gorgeous cinematography.

IN A VALLEY OF VIOLENCE (2016) *** ½

Ti (The House of the Devil) West has proven to be one of the more dependable horror directors of the modern era.  What he hasn’t told us is that underneath it all, there’s a damned fine western director trying to get out.  Not only is In a Valley of Violence an important stepping stone in West’s career, it’s also one of the best westerns of the decade.

West’s other films proudly announce themselves as unapologetic genre films right from the opening credits.  In a Valley of Violence is no different.  The title sequence is a loving homage to Sergio Leone’s Dollars Trilogy and it works as a tribute to the genre while at the same time being a wonderful example of it. 

The plot is a bit one-dimensional, but it’s the purity of the set-up that gives the film its drive.  Ethan Hawke rides into a small border town with his dog in tow and is immediately hassled by a big mouth deputy (James Ransone) who goads him into a fight.  Hawke, naturally, knocks him out with one punch.  Since the asshole is the son of the marshal (John Travolta), he goes to pay him a visit.  He can tell right away Hawke isn’t a man to be trifled with, so he asks him nicely to leave town and gives his word his son won’t cause any more trouble.  Predictably, Ransone doesn’t listen and he hunts Hawke down, kills his dog, and leaves him for dead.

I’m sure you can guess what happens next.  Hawke survives and comes back into town seeking revenge.  Yes, this might sound like For a Few John Wicks More, but that is precisely what makes it so awesome.  Both John Wick and In a Valley of Violence are terrific revenge pictures that hit almost identical notes (right down to the fact that the father of the man who murdered the hero’s dog knows his son fucked up, but still stands by his side because they’re blood).  Since they are given different genre settings, they both feel fresh and exciting, even if their plots are simple and straightforward.

Hawke has gone from indie darling to B movie legend in recent years and his performance in this helps to cement his reputation.  He’s even better here than he was in The Magnificent Seven, and I for one hope he stars in more oaters as time goes on.  Karen Gillan is given the thankless job as the bad guy’s fiancée, but she nevertheless is a joy to watch whenever she comes on screen.  Some of Ransone’s dialogue and mannerisms seem a bit too modern day in the western setting, but he nevertheless makes for an intimidating villain.

It’s Travolta though who really crackles.  Although his screen time is limited, he delivers one of his all-time best villain roles.  Walking with a wooden leg, sporting a salt and pepper beard, and almost purring his lines in a smooth southern drawl, Travolta seems to be relishing the opportunity to play a western heavy.  I’d love for him to take on more of these character actor-type of roles because they fit him like a glove.

THE SEVEN MAGNIFICENT GLADIATORS (1984) **

The stars of Hercules, Lou Ferrigno and Sybil Danning once again teamed up for another sword and sorcery epic.  This time, it’s a remake of Akira Kurosawa’s The Seven Samurai.  You might think it’s weird that Italian hackmeisters Bruno Mattei and Claudio Fragasso were doing their version of a Kurosawa movie, but it’s not so odd when you consider that the Roger Corman-produced Warrior and the Sorceress, a sword and sorcery remake of Yojimbo, was released the same year.  Sadly, it’s not nearly as much fun as Hercules.  It’s no Warrior and the Sorceress either.

So, there’s this asshole who goes running around slaughtering villagers and robbing them blind.  He decides to take a break from all the pillaging, but vows to return and steal what little of the village is still up for grabs.  Luckily for them, the villagers have this sword that will choose the right man to protect the town.  However, if you aren’t the right guy, the sword will fry your hand.  Naturally, Lou Ferrigno holds the sword with no problem and he gets Sybil Danning and five other friends to help the villagers fight the bad guy.

The Seven Magnificent Gladiators plays like a cross between an Italian peplum adventure from the ‘60s and an American sword and sorcery epic from the ‘80s.  It’s not bad or anything, but it’s not exactly a sterling example of the genre.  Much of the entertainment value comes from the awful dubbing of Ferrigno (which adds to the ‘60s peplum feel immensely) and the badass performance by the scantily clad Danning.  (This was her second Seven Samurai remake after Battle Beyond the Stars.)

There is a chariot race scene early on that's edited and photographed so poorly that it plays like a blueprint for a 21st century action sequence.  The incoherent editing and the shoddy camerawork are enough to give you a headache.  Thank goodness, the action gets better as it goes along as Mattei and Fragasso handle all the sword fights and fight scenes in a more competent manner.

PADDINGTON 2 (2018) ****

I thoroughly enjoyed the first Paddington, but I had no idea how much I’d love the second one.  Paddington 2 is a beautiful, enchanting, and heartwarming motion picture that children of all ages will enjoy.  That’s not something I expected to feel when I went to see it, but it’s the truth.  I’m a guy who generally likes slasher, exploitation, and grindhouse types of movies.  However, I am not immune to the charms of a cute bear in a red hat.

Paddington 2 isn’t quite as dark as the first film.  This time around, the villain (a delightful Hugh Grant) isn’t out to kill and stuff the poor bear, just frame him and send him to jail.  The fact that an adorable bear like Paddington is going to The Big House is distressing in its own right.  Since Paddington has a way of spreading cheer wherever he goes, it’s safe to say that he won’t be in the clink for long.

In fact, this is the best prison movie since The Shawshank Redemption.

If this was just a cute bear movie, it would be one thing.  Director Paul King, who has apparently decided not to rest on his laurels his second go-round, ups his craftsmanship game to 11.  There are some positively jaw-dropping sequences here that are as good as anything Orson Welles ever did with a camera.  The pop-up book sequence is one of the most technically proficient scenes I’ve seen in some time.  Not only is it exhilarating on a technical level, it is a beautiful and enchanting moment that gives the audience a taste of Paddington’s aspirations.  Once King has laid out Paddington’s dreams in such a wonderful manner, you’d be totally heartless not to root for him throughout the rest of the picture.

Not only is the film heartfelt and genuinely moving, it’s also quite hilarious.  The extended sequence where Paddington, ever trying to do a good deed, tries his hand at washing windows is reminiscent of Charlie Chaplin.  Heck, later in the film there is even a direct Chaplin homage that is also very funny.  Hugh Grant also gets lots of laughs as the dastardly villain, the wonderfully named Phoenix Buchanan.

In short, Paddington 2 is The Godfather 2 of talking bear movies.  It’s also the second-best film I’ve seen this month in which Sally Hawkins invites an animal with humanlike features into her home and shares a touching underwater scene with it.  If that isn’t a rave review, I don’t know what is. 

FORCE OF EXECUTION (2013) ** ½

Steven Seagal stars as a gangster who sends his right-hand man (Bren Foster) to perform a hit in a prison.  When he kills the wrong man, Foster must atone for his mistake.  A rival boss has his men tie Foster down and cripple his hands, causing him to go into early retirement.  Foster then spends his time as a bum living above Danny Trejo’s diner.  Meanwhile, a criminal fresh out of jail (Ving Rhames) makes a play for Seagal’s territory.  Seagal then must bring Foster out of retirement to take Rhames down.

Force of Execution is a tad better than expected for a latter-day Seagal effort.  The gang war plotline is cliched, but there are enough solid moments to keep you watching.  Things improve once Rhames gets out of jail and starts turning the heat up on Seagal.  (It should also be noted that although Rhames plays a character who’s been in prison and is named “Iceman”, this doesn’t seem to be an Undisputed sequel as far as I could tell.)

Sure, the film is overlong and a bit over-plotted, but Foster’s plotline helps to make it memorable.  His road to redemption is reminiscent of the original Django with Franco Nero as they both must overcome having their hands crippled by the bad guys.  Nero never had Danny Trejo in his corner though.  Trejo’s character just so happens to be a “Mexican witch doctor” who intentionally lets poisonous scorpions sting Foster’s hands to help them heal quicker.  I have no idea if this has any basis in medical fact, but it certainly makes for a cool scene.

Foster is a talent to watch too.  Even though his character can’t use his hands for much of the movie, he still does a great job kicking ass without them.  He's a solid actor as well and reminded me a bit of Scott Adkins in some of his scenes. 

Seagal is marginally more invested here than usual.  The scene where he lovingly talks about his gun collection is nice.  The way he goes on about them is enough to make you think they aren’t props, but actual pieces from his collection.  While he spends most of the movie sitting behind a desk, he does get up to kick a little ass in the final reel.  It’s here where he dons the scarf and sunglasses look we now associate with the modern era of Seagal films.  (He’d later adopt similar looks in Sniper:  Special Ops and Code of Honor.)  If only he got out from behind the desk sooner, this might’ve been a *** deal.

TRASH (1970) * ½

Trash was the second part of director Paul Morrissey’s trilogy of low budget underground films produced by Andy Warhol.  It looks and feels cheap and amateurish in just about every way.  I guess if it wasn’t for the nudity, rampant drug use, and use of trans actresses it would’ve been promptly forgotten.

Joe Dallesandro stars as a junkie who gets high so often that he can’t get it up for his lover (Holly Woodlawn).  Most of the movie is devoted to interchangeable scenes of Dallesandro shooting up, trying, and failing to get it on with different women.  Trust me when I tell you that this is all less than riveting stuff.

Things start to look up in the third act though.  It’s here where things turn into a deranged soap opera as Holly catches Joe cheating on her with her very pregnant sister.  I also enjoyed the ending where Holly and Joe try to fake a pregnancy in order to collect welfare.  There’s also a scene in which Holly fucks herself with a beer bottle that has to be seen to be believed.  

It’s a shame that the first hour is so damned dull because the last half hour is pretty bonkers.  You can almost imagine John Waters was taking notes while watching Trash when he was preparing Pink Flamingos.  Whether or not you can get that far will depend on your willingness to sit through long, boring scenes of heroin-induced erectile dysfunction.