LOWLIFE (2018) **

As you all probably know, I’ve been watching a lot of El Santo movies lately.  When I saw this advertised, I thought it was going to be kind of like a modern version of the classic Lucha Libre cinema.  As it turns out, that’s not the case.  It’s more of a Pulp Fiction variant as it consists of a handful of interconnected crime stories. 

This first story focuses on a former Mexican wrestler named El Monstruo (Ricardo Adam Zarate) who is now reduced to acting as a doorman for a back-alley bordello.  The second tale is about a struggling motel owner (Nicki Micheaux) who is seeking an organ donor for her dying husband by any means necessary.  The third centers around a guy (Shaye Ogbonna) whose best friend (Jon Oswald) emerges from a long prison stretch with an extremely problematic face tattoo.  In the final tale, all the stories come together for a violent climax.

The set-up had potential, and there are some clever moments along the way, but overall Lowlife just doesn’t quite work.  Much of the black humor lands with a thud, and the tone is rarely consistent.  Most disappointing is the character of El Monstruo.  In Pulp Fiction, it didn't matter when we didn’t see the big boxing match because the rest of the movie was so breathtakingly original.  Here, we just feel shortchanged by the lack of Lucha Libre action.  What makes it worse is that El Monstruo, who is prone to violent fits of rage, blacks out whenever he goes on rampage, so we only see the aftermath of the bloody carnage he wreaks.  If anything would’ve saved this movie, it would’ve been some serious masked Mexican wrestler action.  Even with the benefit of a worthy Mexican wrestler, I’m still not sure Lowlife would’ve been highly recommended.

THE SISTERS BROTHERS (2018) *** ½

The cute title makes The Sisters Brothers sound like it’s going to be a comedy.  Sort of a Step Brothers Out West kind of thing.  While there is some levity and humorous moments along the way, this is more about struggling with grief, living with trauma, and the burden of fraternal ties.  

The Sisters Brothers are a pair of henchmen who do dirty deeds at the behest of the shady “Commodore” (Rutger Hauer).  Charlie (Joaquin Phoenix) is the de facto leader, a hard-drinking, trigger-happy scoundrel that maybe likes his profession of tracking and killing a bit too much.  Eil (John C. Reilly) is the more sensible of the two, but just because he’s often the voice of reason doesn’t mean he isn’t just as quick and deadly with a pistol.  Although he’s fiercely loyal to his brother to a fault, Eli’s constantly searching for an opportunity to leave his life of bloodshed behind.  Charlie, on the other hand, revels in it, perpetuating the cycle of his family’s violent past.  

Their target is a chemist (Riz Ahmed), who has figured out a formula for finding gold.  He takes up with a detective (Jake Gyllenhaal), who turns on the Commodore in search for buried treasure.  Once the Sisters catch up to them, greed takes over and the four men form a shaky alliance that could end bitterly at any moment. 

There are shots and scenes here that evoke Ford and Huston.  Whereas their films were more about perpetuating the myths of the Old West, director Jacques (A Prophet) Audiard is more concerned about how men cope with the legacy of violence.  Even if there’s more on his mind than just the standard cowboy stuff, Audiard still gives Western fans plenty of gunplay and shootouts. 

Reilly is fantastic.  He gives one of his career-best performances as the introspective, protective, and loyal Eli.  Phoenix is phenomenal as his brooding, volatile, drunken brother Charlie.  His performance in this is somewhat similar to his role in The Master, and with this, Joker and I’m Still Here, he delivers another memorable performance of someone stricken with mental illness and alcoholism.  

This will not be a movie for all tastes.  It’s deliberately paced and has some serious lulls in between the violence.  Also, it’s sad to see the usually charismatic Rutger Hauer wasted in what is nothing more than a cameo, even if his character casts a long shadow story wise.  These are minor quibbles in the long run as there are plenty of affecting moments along the way.  Besides, how can you pass up a movie that stars Dewey Cox AND Johnny Cash? 

AKA:  Golden River.

THE BEASTS OF TERROR (1973) **

A pair of criminal lovebirds are on a joyride when they are abducted by the henchmen of a mad doctor and taken back to his lair.  There, he uses his captives for his zombification experiments and sells the female zombies into white slavery.  Since the police are powerless to stop these brutes, they call on everyone’s favorite Lucha Libre superstar, El Santo and his loyal sidekick Blue Demon to help crack the case. 

The set-up sounds ideal for an El Santo adventure.  A film that features a couple of thrill-killers, a mad doctor, and zombie sex slaves sounds like a recipe for success to me.  Unfortunately, El Santo and Blue Demon are more or less supporting players in this one.  In fact, it takes almost twenty minutes for either of them to finally show up, and even then, the duo spends nearly half the movie in their car, either on a stakeout or tailing the suspects.

While The Beasts of Terror boasts having three wrestling scenes, it’s rather disappointing as they are all much too brief to have any real impact.  (One is probably less than thirty seconds.)  There are also no musical numbers to be had, nor are their any dance routines.  Well, there’s a drunk girl who dances wildly twice.  I guess I should’ve said there’s no CHOREOGRAPHED dance routines.

The lack of El Santo and Blue Demon in this one gives me the feeling that this was an unrelated (possibly unreleased) movie that producers padded with newly shot footage of the two famed masked wrestlers.  I mean they never once make contact with the kidnap victims and when the tragic ending occurs, they just stand around off screen before shaking hands and getting in their cars and leaving.  You could’ve easily edited them out of the film, and it would’ve have affected the plot in any way.

The meat of the movie feels like a Mexican version of an American exploitation picture.  There’s a skeevy scene where one of the kidnap victims seduces the villain’s hunchback assistant to win her freedom.  Nothing is ever shown, but it’s probably the only real memorable moment in the whole flick.  The score is funkier than usual, which helps, but overall, The Beasts of Terror isn’t a terribly vital entry in the El Santo filmography.

AKA:  Santo and Blue Demon vs. the Beasts of Terror.

ALTITUDE (2017) ***

This week, I was a guest on Matt Poirier’s Direct to Video Connoisseur Podcast discussing the career of Dolph Lundgren.  As part of the discussion, we decided to give a new-to-us Dolph flick a look-see and compare notes.  While there’s a part of me that wishes we had chosen a movie that took better advantage of Dolph’s talents, I have to admit that Altitude is surprisingly, a lot of fun.   It’s a throwback to the airplane actioners of the ‘90s such as Passenger 57, Executive Decision, and Air Force One.  There’s even a little bit of déjà vu from Non-Stop as well.  (Man, it makes me feel old to say something from the ‘90s is a “throwback”, but oh well.)  You can listen to our full discussion here: https://www.talkshoe.com/episode/8308715?fbclid=IwAR2ZQf92_CtPZzqm5DC1JEqN_UJcw4BZzNf2sgiW_WC4RyJA0aS5kE1fJ3Q

Denise Richards stars as a demoted FBI agent on a cross-country flight back to DC to work a crummy desk job.  While onboard, she’s approached by a passenger who offers her $50 million if she can get him off the plane safely.  As it turns out, a gang of thieves has hijacked the plane and are planning to crash the bird to cover their tracks.  With the crew members indisposed and confronted with an incompetent air marshal, Richards takes it upon herself to stop the bad guys and save the passengers.

They say there aren’t enough good roles for women of a certain age, but Altitude plays like a manifesto to prove the naysayers wrong.  This is an excellent vehicle for Richards, who’s at the top of her game.  She’s a lot of fun to watch, and to my pleasant surprise, makes for a credible action heroine.  

Of all the actresses in Hollywood, I was not expecting Denise Richards to get a Totally Unrelated Badass Moment scene.  Usually, these are reserved for the likes of Clint Eastwood or Steven Seagal or someone like that.  And what a badass she is.  This scene cleverly uses her sexpot image to usurp the audience’s expectations.  It begins with a man taking people hostage inside an office building while having phone sex with an unseen sexy woman.  When he finally asks her what’s she’s wearing, the filmmakers cut away to Richards outside the building surrounded by FBI agents holding the phone to her ear and saying, “Kevlar!”  Naturally, this leads to the big moment when she storms into the building, diffuses the situation, and takes down the gunman.  

From the opening moments, Altitude announces itself as a quirky actioner that doesn’t quite play by the rules.  Many films like this have a clever opening, but quickly fall into the same repetitive lulls that most DTV actioners run into.  Not this one.  It’s constantly a little bit better at every turn than you’d expect.

You make think I’m crazy, but it’s similar in some ways to Dolph’s classic Showdown in Little Tokyo.  Not only does Altitude move like lightning and has zero fat on it, it’s clearly having fun turning traditional action genre clichés on their ear.  What’s refreshing about the film is that the women are much stronger and competent than the men.  Most of the male characters are seen as buffoons or corrupt, while the women are more than capable, smart, and funny.  While Richards is excellent in the lead, it’s Greer Grammer (Kelsey’s daughter) who steals the movie as Dolph’s henchwoman Sadie.  She has a lot of screen presence, kicks some serious ass (she even believably intimidates Dolph), and is just plain fun to watch.  

Even though Altitude has fun messing with the conventions of an airplane action movie doesn’t mean it fails to deliver the goods.  Everything you’d want to see in an airplane actioner is here:  There are evil flight attendants, fights that occur in the cargo hold, and bad guys getting sucked out of the plane.  It’s as every bit as good as Die Hard on a Plane but with Denise Richards could be.  

On the downside, I will say that the action suffers from poor camerawork and fight choreography.  I can almost write that off though, due to the cramped, claustrophobic quarters inside the airplane.  Unfortunately, you don’t get to see Denise square off with Dolph, but she does fight against UFC star Chuck Liddell.  The CGI is also terrible, and the shots of the airplane often looks like something out of a video game.  That too is forgivable, mostly because the film is so fast moving.  Although it takes place in a cramped, confined space, the movie never feels like it’s repeating itself.  The plot always has forward momentum, and there are no unnecessary scenes to bog the pace down.   

I kind of felt bad spending a whole podcast devoted to Dolph Lundgren talking about a movie in which he had such a minor role.  Even though he spends most of his screen time sitting down in the captain’s seat flying the plane, he still delivers a strong performance.  As a die-hard Dolph fan, I did find it funny that the picture on his character’s ID badge was nothing more than Dolph’s IMDb photo!  

In short, Altitude is one DTV action flick that flies high!  

AKA:  Hijacked.  AKA:  Turbulences.  AKA:  Altitude:  Die Hard in the Sky.  

SANTO VS. THE VICE MAFIA (1971) ** ½

The police are powerless to stop a gang of drug dealers.  They enlist the aid of famous Mexican wrestler (and part-time secret agent) El Santo to help stamp the pushers out.  When a wealthy heiress is kidnapped by the notorious bunch, it’s up to El Santo to rescue her.

The best part of this unremarkable yet entertaining El Santo adventure comes when the bad guys dispose of El Santo and one of the henchmen dons an El Santo mask and impersonates him.  Predictably, El Santo knocks the guy out, trades places with him, and stands idly by while the villains shoot the poor dope and incinerate his corpse!  He then spends the next chunk of the movie pretending to be a henchman who’s pretending to be El Santo and foiling the bad guys’ plans from the inside.  

Because of its grounded nature, Santo vs. the Vice Mafia isn’t as wildly entertaining as some of his silliest films, but it’s a solid effort through and through. In fact, I’m sure it would’ve gotten Three Stars if there was a mummy or robot in there somewhere.  Still, I did like the scene where the bad guys get the drop on El Santo by posing as sports journalists and using a trick camera that emits smoke.  I just wish there were more cool Bond-like gadgets throughout the rest of the movie.

There’s only one wrestling match in the entire film, which is a tad disappointing, but the rest of the action is otherwise okay (although it’s nothing really all that memorable).  The musical numbers and dance routines are a lot more entertaining than usual though.  Things kick off with a rollicking musical number set on the rocks of a seaside resort.  Later, the same guy does a song in a nightclub.  (It looks like someone’s living room.)  After he leaves the stage, a line of chorus girls does a big choreographed dance routine.  (There’s also another amusing routine later in the film.)  These scenes are a lot of fun and help punch up an otherwise by-the-numbers outing.  While it probably won’t win over any new fans, indiscriminate El Santo die-hards are likely to be amused.

THE SIN OF HAROLD DIDDLEBOCK (1947) **

Writer/director Preston Sturges had a number of hits under his belt in the mid ‘40s and practically had carte blanche in Hollywood.  He was a big Harold Lloyd fan and decided to make The Sin of Harold Diddlebock as a comeback vehicle for him.  (Lloyd hadn’t appeared in a movie in over nine years at that point.)  It sounded like a match made in Heaven, but unfortunately for comedy fans, their styles never really mesh.  The fact that the laughs are precious and few makes the teaming of the two comedic titans even more disappointing.

The film opens with the classic football game scene from The Freshman.  It’s supposed to do two things simultaneously:  Remind the audience of just how funny Lloyd could be while also acting as cheap stock footage.  Too bad there’s more laughs in the footage from The Freshman than there is in the rest of the movie.

After winning the big football game, Harold gets offered a lowly job with the promise of an eventual promotion.  Fast-forward twenty years and he’s still stuck at the same desk.  When he complains to the boss, he’s promptly fired.  Faced with few options, the usually teetotaling Harold decides to go out and get drunk for the very first time.  He goes on a wild bender and awakens from his drunken stupor surprised to learn he’s now in possession of a failing circus.  Harold then goes off on a frantic search to pawn off the circus on someone else, but of course he gets no takers. 

The best scene is when Harold goes into the bar and the overly eager bartender played by Edgar (Duck Soup) Kennedy mixes him up a customized drink.  Kennedy is quite funny in this scene, and it’s a shame he wasn’t given more to do elsewhere in the picture.  Other bits are played by such familiar faces as Lionel Stander (as a bookie), Margaret Hamilton (as a maid), and Rudy Vallee (as a potential investor).   

The rest of the picture is low on laughs and surprisingly light on the physical comedy Lloyd is known for.  I guess that’s to be expected, given the fact that he was much older and hadn’t appeared in a movie in over a decade, but still.  He doesn’t give a bad performance either.  It’s just that the film itself is rather lackluster.  The big finale where Harold tries to retrieve a lion from the ledge of a tall building is supposed to evoke memories of the iconic Safety Last.  However, it just comes off as a hollow imitation and isn’t very funny to boot. 

The film sorely lacks Sturges’ comedic touch too.  Sturges might’ve meant The Sin of Harold Diddlebock as a love letter to Lloyd, but I think he would’ve been better off allowing Lloyd to direct the picture as their sensibilities don’t quite gel.  Ultimately, its biggest sin is that it just isn’t very funny.   

AKA:  Mad Wednesday.

ONE-EYED JACKS (1961) ***

There’s a fine line between art and crap.  Because of that, it can sometimes be difficult to tell if the movie you’re watching is terrible or if it’s a work of greatness.  That’s the overriding feeling you get while watching One-Eyed Jacks, the first and only film directed by Marlon Brando.  It’s obtuse and frustrating at times, and yet it’s hard to take your eyes off it.  I can’t say it’s particularly well-made or has any distinguishing directorial touches, but it has a lure to it that is hard to deny, even if the film itself is rather leaden.

Brando replaced Stanley Kubrick as director, if you can believe it.  He stars as a bank robber named Kid who gets left in the desert by partner, Dad (Karl Malden).  Naturally, Kid gets caught by the authorities and is sent to prison.  He breaks out five years later and heads to Monterey, California where Dad is now sheriff. 

This set-up is rather laborious and will likely have you squirming in your seat but stick with it.  An odd thing happens as One-Eyed Jacks enters into its second act.  It becomes less a western and more a maudlin morality play.  You see, once Kid stares down Dad face to face, he realizes he can’t very well kill the man in cold blood.  Dad is grateful of course, but that all changes when Kid starts messing around with Dad’s stepdaughter.  From here, the picture turns grim, violent, and nearly operatic.  

It’s clear when you watch One-Eyed Jacks that Brando was in over his head.  He went way over schedule and over budget and legend has it his first cut clocked in at a whopping five hours.  The studio naturally took it away from him and cut it down to 141 minutes.  

It’s hard to tell just what he was going for.  At times, it’s introspective and moody.  Other times, there are outbursts of violence.  It’s a western in sheep’s clothing as it doesn’t really cater to the demands of the genre.  It almost seems as if Brando was making it all up as he went along.  The picture, like his acting technique calls for long quiet stretches punctuated by great emotion.  I can’t quite say it works, but it’s certainly something.

At times you can almost feel like Brando is only playing coy with the genre and seeing just how far he could push it.  For example, many scenes in the film take place at the beach.  I can’t say I can recall the last time I saw a western with so many (if any) beach scenes.  It’s as if Brando was literally pushing the western as far west as it could possibly go.  

The drama, as I’ve said, is nearly operatic.  You don’t need to be a psychologist to read into the fact that the protagonist and antagonist are named “Kid” and “Dad”.  Nor is the castration metaphor subtle when Dad catches Kid with his daughter and smashes his gun hand, leaving him unable to “shoot”.

It’s hard to say what Stanley Kubrick would’ve done with the material.  If he had done everything exactly the same, it might’ve been hailed as a masterpiece.  Because Brando did it, it’s merely a curiosity piece.  I don’t think Kubrick, who is known for his cold, detached style would’ve allowed Brando to act as theatrical as he does here.  That unrestrained passion seeps into every other aspect of the movie, making One-Eyed Jacks worth a look for Brando enthusiasts.