RUMBLE (2016) ***

From the generic poster, basic premise, and the participation of Gary Daniels, everything about Rumble suggest it's going to be nothing more than your standard issue “They Kidnapped My Girlfriend, So Now I Have to Participate in an Illegal Underground Fighting Tournament” movie.  To be fair, all of that was enough to get me interested in the first place.  I just wasn’t expecting… THIS.

Gary stars as a disgraced cage fighter who is hiding out in Mexico with his ex-hooker girlfriend (Sissi Fleitas).  Naturally, she’s kidnapped, and the only way Gary can get her back is to fight in a series of unsanctioned MMA matches.  In between fights, Gary tries to track down the mystery man who is orchestrating the illegal tournament and save his girlfriend.

Rumble starts off with a bit of an Unknown vibe.  When Gary’s girlfriend goes missing, no one at his hotel seems to remember either of them.  Eventually, he tracks down a bellhop who helps him on his quest to find his girlfriend.  

From here, I thought I could guess where the movie was going.  In fact, I predicted a major plot twist well before it happened.  However, the final twist caused my jaw to drop.  Very rarely do I get fooled by mysteries.  It’s safe to say that you won’t see the big surprise at the end coming.

I wouldn’t dream of spoiling it for you.  All I’ll say is that without that twist, Rumble would’ve been a decent, but forgettable actioner.  That twist is what elevates it into a goddamned work of art.

Daniels is one of those guys who gets better with age.  Here, he plays a character who has been beaten up by life and he does so admirably enough.  He’s especially good in the last five minutes of the movie.  I guarantee you’ll be just as shocked as Gary was during this scene.  This is truly one of his best films and his legions of fans certainly won’t want to miss it.

COMING SOON TO A BOOKSHELF NEAR YOU

FROM THE BACK COVER:  Do you love horror movies? Probably not as much as author Mitch Lovell does. He's been obsessively watching horror movies since the age of five. After three and a half decades of binging horror flicks, he's written about some of his favorite (and not-so favorite) genre films. From '80s slashers to '50s monster movies. From the works of Stephen King to the films from out of the WWE wrestling ring. From killer animals and creepy kids to wicked witches and deranged Satanists. Mitch reviews them all...

PETER RABBIT (2018) **

Paddington 2 was a wonderful movie that featured a talking animal that was made for children, but could be enjoyed by people of all ages because it didn’t cater to the lowest common denominator.  It was a sweet film based on a children’s book that remembered what made the character so special and kept the spirit its author intended.  Peter Rabbit, on the other hand, does none of that.

Would it surprise you that Peter Rabbit has an obnoxious comic montage set to a terrible pop song at nearly every reel change?  Or that Peter’s nemesis, Mr. McGregor (Domhnall Gleeson) gets pelted in the balls with vegetables several times throughout the film?  Paddington 2 took its inspiration from Charlie Chaplin.  This one takes its cues from the Home Alone series.  That alone is the sure sign you’re in trouble.

As a fan of Beatrix Potter’s stories, I did love the flashbacks that were traditionally animated in the style of the old books.  These sequences are sweet and tender.  Why couldn’t the whole movie be like that?  I guess there’s more money in CGI rabbits nailing General Hux in the gonads with radishes than actually staying true to the spirit of the books.

I’m pretty sure Potter is rolling in her grave right about now.  Her corpse undoubtedly started spinning during the scene in which her beloved character tried to sodomize Sam Neill with a carrot.   Though in all fairness, it was kind of funny to see General Hux perform The People’s Elbow on a bunny.

Speaking of which, Gleeson shows promise as a physical comedian.  Even if the gags get repetitive, the way he gleefully throws himself into his pratfalls is admirable.  I’m pretty sure he was jealous that his dad, Brendan was in Paddington 2 and he got stuck making this crap.

One thing I can say for this version of Peter Rabbit:  At least it doesn’t have a theme song as awful as the one from that recent Nickelodeon show.

THE WALK (2015) ****

I wanted to see this in 3-D when it first came out because the trailer was so damned intense.  Sadly, it only lasted a week in theaters, so I never got a chance to see it on the big screen.  Even at home on my smallish Walmart TV, it’s hair-raising stuff.

The Walk is director Robert Zemeckis’ biopic version of the documentary Man on Wire.  It follows French daredevil Philippe Petit (Joseph Gordon-Levitt), who famously walked on a high wire in between the towers of The World Trade Center when it was still under construction in the mid-‘70s.  We see Petit work his way up from common street mime to dedicated tightrope walker.  When he sees a picture of the towers in a newspaper, he sets off on a mad quest to walk a hundred stories above New York City.

Zemeckis takes Petit’s tale and whittles it down to a story of following your dreams, no matter how crazy they seem.  Much of the film coasts on the charms of Gordon-Levitt’s performance, who spends most of his screen time directly addressing the audience.  This is a deft narrative device because it makes the audience feel like a co-conspirator on his scheme.

I loved Man on Wire, but The Walk affected me on a deeper level.  It’s truly an inspiring film that encourages you to follow whatever path you choose in life.  I really wish I saw it in the theater and in 3-D because Zemeckis knows how to throw a lot of stuff at the screen.  The depth of field stuff looks great too when Gordon-Levitt’s up on the wire looking down at the city below.  I can only imagine how it looked on the big screen.  As someone who is already afraid of heights, I probably would’ve been on the edge of my seat the whole last half-hour.

THE DEATH OF “SUPERMAN LIVES”: WHAT HAPPENED? (2015) ***

I remember in the late ‘90s hearing that Tim Burton was going to make a Superman movie based on The Death of Superman comics with Nicolas Cage as Superman and my brain just melted.  You have to remember, in those days, our comic book movies were few and far between.  They didn’t come out at a bi-monthly rate like they do nowadays.  Sadly, it was never to be.

The allure of what could’ve been is shown in tantalizing glimpses in director Jon Schnepp’s The Death of “Superman Lives”:  What Happened?  It is a documentary in the vein of Jodorowsky’s Dune.  Many of the major players in the film including screenwriter Kevin Smith (who reveals he stole the title from Fletch Lives), producer Jon Peters (who, ever the producer, takes a call in the middle of the interview), and director Tim Burton (who sometimes seems annoyed, but keeps his cool).  We even get to see some parts of the film revived via animation that integrates concept art and storyboards.

Unfortunately, Cage is not interviewed, but his quotes during previously taped interviews make it sound like he was approaching the character with respect while simultaneously putting his own quirky spin on it.  The archival footage of his costume fittings is priceless.  Although the much gossiped about “healing suit” is kind of funky, it’s a revelation to hear that it would’ve only taken up two minutes of screen time.  In fact, Cage actually looks badass with his long hair in the final classic Superman get-up.  His take on Clark Kent would’ve been unique too.  From the footage here, he would’ve made Clark a bigger dork than he’s usually portrayed, which could’ve been promising.  

The documentary itself, though a rather star-studded affair, feels a bit low rent.  The production values are a tad below your average behind-the-scenes DVD bonus feature.  Still, from an informational standpoint, any Superman fan worth their salt should walk away happy.

Superman Lives ultimately found life as Superman Returns.  That film, for me, was a mild and forgettable nostalgia fest that coasted heavily on what had come before.  Even with the oddball demands that Peters made to the script (like Brainiac fighting polar bears and Superman battling a giant spider), with Burton at the helm and Cage in the suit, it would’ve (for good or ill) at least been memorable and had its own identity.

A GOOD MAN (2014) **

After Force of Execution, we find Steven Seagal settling into the Goatee, Scarf, Sunglasses, and Backwards Baseball Cap phase of his career.  In fact, this was originally conceived as a sequel to Force of Execution.  Maybe that’s why the wardrobe (and even his character’s name) stayed the same.

Seagal quits the Army after women and children get killed in a U.S. drone strike.  He takes a job as a handyman in an apartment building and learns his neighbor’s brother (Victor Webster) is in deep to the Russian mob.  Naturally, his little sister is kidnapped by the bad guys and it’s up to Seagal to get her back.

Directed by Keoni Waxman (who also helmed Force of Execution), A Good Man features a surprisingly game Seagal.  He spends very little time sitting down in this one and is up and walking around a lot more than he has been of late.  He has more fighting scenes in this one as any in recent memory, the best being the ones where he uses a samurai sword.  (Is a samurai sword considered a backup piece in the Army?)

I wish “Seagal fighting more” translated into “better movie”, but it doesn’t.  Although A Good Man is fairly competent, it’s also overlong and slow going in some stretches.  There are a lot of subplots that bog things down (like the one with the mismatched cops).  If this had been 89 minutes, it might’ve been okay, but at 103, it’s just too damn long.

Victor Webster is good in an Armie Hammer kind of way.  He’s got soap opera good looks and is a little bland in his delivery, but he carries himself well enough.  The movie really needed someone like Danny Trejo to give Seagal a meaty co-star to play against.  

Seagal is more present during his acting scenes, which is nice.  Although early on, he speaks in an odd, slurred southern drawl that sounds like an elderly blues singer in a rest home for no good reason whatsoever.  (He says, “Muh-fuh-kas” a lot.)  After the opening credits, he drops the accent and begins talking normally.

One notable thing about A Good Man:  Seagal’s sex scene.  No, it’s not notable because he gets it on with a leading lady who’s a third his age.  It’s notable for its placement.  It happens at the very last scene, not halfway through the picture as with most movies.

Other than that weird touch, you’ve seen this stuff before, and done better I might add.  If the movie was a bit more incompetent, it might’ve been more fun.  Oh well, a middle of the road Steven Seagal effort is better than bottom of the barrel one. 

THE CAT AND THE CANARY (1939) ****

A group of relatives are brought together to hear the reading of a will in a mansion deep in the bayou at midnight.  Lawyer George Zucco reveals that Paulette Goddard will be the sole heir to the family fortune, which naturally puts a target on her back.  She and Bob Hope learn of a priceless necklace that happens to be on the grounds, and they decide to look for it.  The lawyer winds up murdered and Goddard fears she is next.  There also happens to be an escaped lunatic known as “The Cat” on the premises.  Is he the real killer, or is someone trying to get their hands on the necklace?

The Cat and the Canary is a spoof of Old Dark House murder-mysteries while at the same time being a sterling example of one.  There are all the usual secret passageways, paintings with eye holes cut out, and spooky housekeepers that you’d expect from something like this.  These clichés were a little mothballed even in 1939.  (Heck, the story had already been filmed three times before.)  Since the film features the dynamite team of Hope and Goddard, it’s nothing less than exhilarating.

Hope gets lots of laughs, usually while keeping his own running commentary on the action.  He has tremendous chemistry with Goddard.  They are simply electric together and whenever they’re on screen together, the picture crackles.  The supporting cast is quite good too.  George Zucco has a few nice moments as the ill-fated lawyer and Gale Sondergaard is amusing as the housekeeper who talks to the spirits.

With Hope front and center bouncing off one-liners, it’s a given that this was going to be funny.  What’s surprising about The Cat and the Canary is that the horror stuff is startlingly good.  The scenes where Goddard is being stalked by “The Cat” brim with atmosphere.  Just the shots of the creepy looking Cat lurking in the foreground is scary by itself.  The climax is genuinely hair-raising and suspenseful too.  It’s truly one of the best horror-comedies ever made.