Disc Reviews

The idea of a vigilante priest hitting the streets to clean up crime is something I can easily get behind. The Reverend is said to be an adaptation from a graphic novel of the same name, though it’s a title I found very little about when doing a cursory search over the internet.  What I did find had the plot centering on a Reverend caught in the trappings of the battle between good and evil. Mixing in a supernatural element, some may start to think about The Preacher graphic novels; well, don’t fret, this film doesn’t pack the punch that those beloved graphic novels do, but it’s a noble attempt in the indie horror collection.

The film does open promisingly enough as Rutger Hauer plays the role one would assume to be as something evil, while confronting a man in white surrounded by several officials of the church armed with swords  Some may recognize Doug Bradley (Pinhead from the Hellraiser series) as Reverend Andrews.  The heated exchange is a negotiation over the soul of an individual.  This scene is an introduction to the forces of good and evil doing their bidding for winning souls onto their side.  Unfortunately the scene simply works as a cold opening to do nothing more than show us that religious figures in the church are at odds with those who are evil.  Basically a common-sense notion, and the scene bears no importance on the film that follows.

It is never an easy thing to have to pick up the pieces to a former life that was believed perfect, especially when you are completely blindsided by that life’s destruction. That is the circumstance that both leads Garcelle Beauvais and Brian White find themselves in And Then There Was You. The film features a couple of familiar faces including Leon, Lynn Whitfield, as well as Greg Vaughn, who I haven’t seen since his short stint on Charmed.

Natalie Gilbert (Garcelle Beauvais) and Joshua Gilbert (Leon) have always appeared to be a picture perfect couple: gorgeous house with manicured lawn, financially secure, and the two simply just looked good together; to everyone around them as well as Natalie they just seemed to have it together, or at least that’s how they appeared. So as you may imagine, it came as quite a shock for Natalie when she arrived home one day to find Joshua packing his belongings into a U-Haul, dropping the bomb on her that during the last five years of their eleven year marriage that he has not been faithful, not only straying but actually having a family with kids on the side. Natalie is devastated by the knowledge that he is leaving her to be with his true family (in his words), the icing on the cake being that he also cleaned out their bank account, leaving her with nothing. (If you listen closely you may be able to make out of the chorus of women’s outrage all over the world).

"You know, the smallest thing can change your life. In the blink of an eye, something happens by chance, when you least expect it, sets you on a course that you never planned into a future you never imagined. Where will it take you? That's the journey of our lives. Our search for the light... "

The same thing can be said for movies. They are a journey that we willingly take. Often they lead us to unexpected places. And if we're very lucky, if the film is very good, there'll be the slightest bit of change in ourselves because of the experience.

Paula Patton has managed to stand out on the big screen alongside Hollywood heavyweights like Denzel Washington (Déjà Vu, 2 Guns) and Tom Cruise (Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol), but she’s still probably best known for being married to Beetle-douche. That’s why I was hoping Baggage Claim, her first big solo starring vehicle, would be so much better than it turned out to be. It’s tempting to dismiss it as just another corny, clichéd romantic comedy, and forget about it until it pops up on TBS two years from now. But the film squanders too much appealing talent and insults the audiences intelligence too often to let it off the hook quite so easily.

"My relationships have never been cleared for takeoff."

There are two very distinctive schools of thought about Walt Disney’s The Jungle Book. There are the Kipling fanatics who have never forgiven Disney for taking a story considered sacred in literary circles and creating something that honestly bears (pardon the pun) little resemblance to the original work. These folks rightfully point out that the story contains almost nothing recognizable about the story and characters from Kipling’s beloved classic. I have often condemned projects that take names like The Night Stalker and Battlestar Galactica and create a vision incompatible with the traditions I associate with them. Therefore this review might seem a bit hypocritical when I tell you I side with the other camp that considers this film to be a milestone, not only in Disney animation, but in animation history itself. The characters might be distantly removed remote ancestors to Kipling’s creatures, but they are truly classic creations in their own right. What better definition of a classic can there be than the influence that The Jungle Book still has 40 years later, not only on our pop culture but on the careers and lives of today’s artists. I venture to say that more people are familiar with Disney’s renderings of these characters than Kipling’s; I agree the caparison isn’t exactly fair, but it is accurate.

So why do I think this isn’t the same as the “reimaginings” I’ve condemned in these very pages?  I begin by pointing out that we’re talking about a film that has stood the test of time, perhaps enduring beyond its own roots. The second is the fact that this version is not the same medium as its original. When ABC aired The Night Stalker, it was reinventing its original in the same medium, that of a television series. Disney’s The Jungle Book is an animated film whose audience is nothing like that intended for the stories. This distinction was not lost on Walt Disney himself, who lost a close friend and colleague over his decision to create this vision of The Jungle Book. Long-time “go to” man Bill Peet had originally developed the Kipling story for Disney. He kept quite close to the source material and submitted storyboards that told a decidedly darker story with far more dire consequences and darker characters. The impasse led to his leaving Disney Studios forever. As Peter Jackson discovered, film is a far different presentation than the written word, and what works for one does not often translate verbatim to the other. Ask anyone who’s ever tried to develop a Stephen King novel. Walt Disney was attempting to deliver a children’s film that the whole family could enjoy. He rightly deduced that the compelling tale Kipling intended simply wouldn’t translate into the kind of adventure Disney fans were already expecting by 1966. Instead, Disney ordered his staff to avoid reading Kipling and concentrate on delivering characters that the entire family could enjoy. The result is, simply put, unforgettable.

Upon first glance, The Adventurer: Curse of the Midas Box looks like nothing more than a straight to video mash-up of Sherlock Holmes, Harry Potter, and numerous other young-adult adventure films.  The first impression would be correct, but what is surprising is simply how much fun this film is, and it was made for a quarter of what those block busters had.  It’s a treasure hunt filled with legends of mythical beasts and a location filled with a labyrinth of secret passages.  The film simply is the kind of movie that fits in snugly with the adventure films I grew up with throughout the 80s and early 90s.

The adventure sets off as Mariah Mundi (Aneurin Barnard) encounters Charity (Michael Sheen) who he encounters in a museum and has been severely injured.  After meeting with the young boy’s parents as they tend to his wounds, Charity hands the mother an amulet that he believes people will stop at nothing to obtain.  As the children are sent home, the adventure only begins for the Mundi kids as a pair of men break into their home causing the children to go on the run.  It’s while on the run the children discover that their mother has handed them the amulet, each with a half, which is why the children are being pursued by a pair of hired thugs.

“I know many of you are probably wondering, ‘What the hell is Mike Tyson gonna do up here on stage tonight,’ right? Frankly, I’m wondering the same thing too.”

If you or I decided to get a face tattoo, it would almost definitely be the craziest thing that’s ever happened to either of us. On the other hand, I’m not sure Mike Tyson’s now-infamous facial ink even cracks the Top 5 list of most insane things he’s ever said or done. That very unpredictability is what makes him an ideal, endlessly compelling subject for a one-man show.

By Kevin Tall

“Oh the inanity!”

You have to interfere in what is wrong to make it right.”

When a movie is described as a “timeless classic,” the implication is the film contains a level of artistic merit and cross-generational appeal that has made it relevant decades after its release, and will make it watchable decades from now. The flip side is the type of film that is very much of the time it was created. Despite what ought to be a universal message about caring for one another, The Inn of the Sixth Happiness — making a welcome debut on Blu-ray as part of the Fox Studio Classics series — belongs in the latter category.

“A successful breakout depends on three things: Layout, Routine, and Outside Help.”

You know, there was a time when the public could only dream of an Arnold Schwarzenegger and Sylvester Stallone team-up. Now thanks to a little film called The Expendables, when it comes to the realm of action star team-ups, anything is possible. Case in point: Escape Plan. When this film was first announced, I figure it would be devoid of any real substance and just another attempt to capitalize on the success of  Expendables (the first one; the second is not that great), but the film surprisingly holds up on its own without having to cling to anything else.