"Nukie" is Not a Glowing Example of Filmmaking

“Nukie” contains a talking monkey, a nun, and people in rubber alien suits. These elements would normally gel quite nicely into a fantastic film, however, in the case of this 1988 film, they do not. Perhaps an elephant that shoots lasers from it’s eyes or a boxing kangaroo is all “Nukie” needed to rise above the mediocrity into which it falls. I usually champion crazy, low-budget, bad movies from the 1970’s and 1980’s. “Nukie,” unfortunately, is bad in the most common sense of the word.

An alien named Nukie and his brother, Miko, crash land on Earth. Nukie lands in Africa and Miko ends up at the facilities of what is known in the film as “Space Foundation” in Florida. Miko becomes the subject of study by scientists at the Space Foundation while Nukie is befriended by two brothers, Tiko and Toki (Siphiwe and Sipho Mlangeni), who are apparently members of an African warrior tribe. When it is discovered that something strange involving aliens is occurring, Dr. Eric Harvey (Steve Railsback) is sent to Africa to investigate. What Dr. Harvey discovers is that “Nukie” does not have any of the bad movie charm as do classic fun bad movies like “Samurai Cop,” “R.O.T.O.R,” “The Room,” “Birdemic,“ “Mac and Me,” or “Blood Freak.” Dr. Harvey is amazed at the lack of anything terribly interesting or amusing in the film. The acting in “Nukie” is not very good, but it is not horrifically fun as some of the performances found in “The Room” or “Samurai Cop.” Steve Railsback is uncharacteristically restrained in “Nukie.” In the 1978 film, “The Stunt Man,” he played every scene with an unflinching intensity which was a bit distracting. He played his role in Brian Trenchard-Smith’s 1982 film, “Turkey Shoot” in much the same way. Whenever I watch a Steve Railsback film, I plan on sitting a few extra feet away from the screen because I know there is a very strong possibility that his intensity may cause him to fall out of the screen into my living room. Railsback does not have as much screen time in “Nukie” as does the titular alien or his brother. This is a case in which I would have preferred to see more Railsback and less Nukie. Nukie is a rather boring alien creation and Miko is no better. They do not look goofy enough, just rubbery and dull, like bad pizza crust. I was talked into buying a vhs copy of this movie from a trailer I saw online somewhere, probably on You Tube. It was not expensive, thankfully. It was worth the 95 minutes I spent watching it to learn of it’s lack of delivering on a promisingly bad trailer, that is, the trailer made it look like the film would be marvelously horrible. Alas, “Nukie” is just bad, not fun bad. Not even Joel, Mike, or the bots could find much to laugh at with this one. The vhs sales marketing flier pictured below is more interesting than the film. Wait a minute!! "Nukie" does have "broad audience appeal" and it features Ronald France from "Sanna." Maybe I should reconsider what I have written thusfar.

The talking monkey did have some promise, or at least, the idea of a talking monkey held promise, however, as written, the talking monkey does not deliver much in the way of entertaining badness. “Nukie” is as flat as a pancake and does not even have any blueberries in it or any syrup on it and it’s not even fluffy. “Nukie” is not quite a bomb, but it does fizzle out.

I Was Bound to Write About "Prometheus"

The straight-forwardness with which “Prometheus” tells it’s story is the film’s most impressive feature. If you liked Ridley Scott’s 1979 film, “Alien,” there is a very good chance you will enjoy his new film. I am not going to pretend to understand everything that happens in the film. You will likely have several questions after watching it. I did. Normally, this bothers me, however, in the case of “Prometheus,” I was so overwhelmed by the scope and superiority of the filmmaking that these unanswered questions became only minor nuisances that soon left my brain. I would not be surprised to hear that “Prometheus” is the first of two or three films that will serve as a prequel to the 1979 film. I do not know if “Prometheus” is supposed to be a prequel to “Alien” or not. Arguments could be successfully debated on both sides. It does not really matter to me. As a stand-alone film, “Prometheus” succeeds in being very entertaining as a result of a focused narrative and very good performances aided by some very good science fiction writing. What I mean by “very good science fiction writing” is that the script never gets sidetracked by silly subplots or a need to explore a character’s past love affair with another character, for example. References are made to relationships in the film and it is made clear at the beginning of the film that the characters Elizabeth Shaw (Noomi Rapace) and Charlie Holloway (Logan Marshall-Green) are a couple, however, that is all we need to know. No backstory about this subject is necessary in this film, and fortunately, none is given to bog down the proceedings. Characters are introduced smoothly in the film. It is as if the viewer walks into the room and encounters somebody for the first time. There is no fanfare and the trope of showing someone from the back and having them turn around slowly is not used. One of the most egregious uses of this kind of trope was used in “Star Trek 2” to introduce Captain Kirk. Yes, it’s Shatner. Yes, it’s Kirk and he is an iconic character. It was still pretty corny, though. In that scene, Kirk was first shown in shadows, then the lighting is adjusted as he walks closer into the frame to reveal that it is the massively cool Captain Kirk. Make no mistake, he is massively cool…but that was corny. Charlize Theron’s performance as Meredith Vickers, the leader of the mission of which the ship, Prometheus, undertakes, is fantastic. She could have played her character as a soulless bitch. Fortunately, Theron is an excellent actress and she stands out playing her character as a no-nonsense woman who understands her role on the ship and with the company for which she works. The script allows her to be more than a two-dimensional cardboard cutout. Such is the case with most of the characters in the film. Noomi Rapace also stands out as Elizabeth Shaw, one of the scientists aboard Prometheus, a vessel assigned to locate the source of a mysterious image which was found in seven different locations on Earth. The planet the crew of Prometheus is on course for is discovered to be full of many surprises, none of which I will divulge. As I inferred, I was left with some questions after watching the film. I have discussed the film with friends, as this film will surely inspire conversation. Said conversations have helped explain some, but not all, of my questions, as it does not appear that answers to some of our questions were in the film, which leads to my estimation that one or two more films will follow. “Prometheus” is very good science-fiction/horror entertainment and is among Ridley Scott’s best films, but not quite as good as “Alien” or “Blade Runner.” Those two films are science-fiction classics. “Prometheus” falls just a bit short of the level of greatness of those two films. It is no slight to “Prometheus” to make such a statement. Though I do not want you to feel bound to see “Prometheus,” I do hope that my words will direct you to some interest in it.

"Rock of Ages" is Not Like Bad Medicine

I was a bit trepidatious going in to see “Rock of Ages,” the new film about a guy, a girl, and a band set in 1987. The story in the film is quite a simple one, however, “Rock of Ages” is not about the story, so the more comfortable you are knowing that going into the film, the better off you will be as far as your enjoyment of the film is concerned. Julianne Hough, who I admit, I knew nothing about, which is probably best, plays Sherrie Christian, a girl from Oklahoma who travels to Hollywood to find fame and fortune. Diego Boneta, who I know equally as little about as Julianne Hough, plays Drew Boley, a young man who works at a music club owned and operated by Dennis Dupress (Alec Baldwin). Here is a big surprise---Drew has his own band and also wants to become famous. “Rock of Ages” takes place in a two day time frame, which is a very good idea as far as structuring goes. The film is not interested in character development. Usually, this is not wise, however, “Rock of Ages” is not about character development or profound storytelling. It is about the music and the fun of seeing people like Alec Baldwin, Catherine Zeta-Jones, Tom Cruise, Russell Brand, Bryan Cranston, and even Paul Giamatti sing 80’s songs. The film, as mentioned, takes place in 1987. It is based on a musical by Adam Shankman. Shankman also directs this film version of his show. What works best in the film is the placement of the 1980’s songs. None of the musical numbers, which are all popular songs from the 80’s, are forced or seem shoehorned into the action. This, I believe, would be a very difficult thing to achieve, that is, directing a movie musical and being able to place the musical numbers at just the right time in the film. The same perfect placement of songs into a musical can be seen in the film versions of “Grease,” “Hair,” “Chicago,” and the fantastic 1972 film, “1776.” In these films, the songs and music flow seamlessly into the action of the film. “Rock of Ages” is not of the caliber of these other four films, however, it is one of the better musicals I have seen. The musical numbers are full of positive energy and they move the plot along, as songs in a musical are supposed to do. It appears that the entire cast enjoys their chance to sing onscreen. We have seen some of the cast members sing in films before. Catherine Zeta-Jones was very good in “Chicago.” Tom Cruise sang in “Magnolia.” Remember that great scene in “Magnolia,” in which the entire cast is shown, one at a time, singing the Aimee Mann song, “Wise Up?” That was a great scene in a wonderful film. Another great thing about “Rock of Ages” is it’s flawless attention to detail. I almost always notice any imperfection in a period film, especially when a film made in 2012 is set in 1975 or 1985, etc. Usually, there will be a line of dialogue which will not match the time period. For instance, a character in a film set in 1975 will say he or she waited “online” for tickets to a movie. Regardless of time period, this is a horrible misuse of that word, but the idea of anything being “online” has become prevalent only in the last twenty years. Anyway, enough of my rattling on about the English language, a once proud system of communication, which is dying a horrible death as we speak. Every set, outdoor scene, costume, looked authentic, true to the year in which the film was based. Only one thing bugged me, however, my attention to music began to wane around the late 1980’s so this thing that bothered me may be correct after all. The character of Drew (Diego Boneta), near the end of the film, joins a boy band, a new and alarming phenomenon that, we all rememeber, began at that time. In one of the closing numbers in the film, Drew is wearing one of those ridiculous over the ear microphones that always make singers look like they are taking phone orders from somebody. Since my music awareness waned in the late 80’s, due to the quality of popular music badly dwindling around that time, I may have not noticed that these silly over the ear microphones may have begun being used around this time. Madonna was the first artist I remember using these. That was in the early 90’s, I think. Anyway, that is not a big issue. I did enjoy the film’s attitude towards the intrusion of the boy band into the popular music scene. The film basically gives this entire notion the finger, a feeling for which I am in complete agreement. I think the film understands and, I know I understand, that music does evolve, however, in that evolution must come quality, not the lazy sameness that has plagued the music industry for the last twenty years. Obviously, there are some exceptions, however, there are not that many exceptions. Anyway, back to “Rock of Ages.” The entire cast seems to be having a great time. The two leads, Julianne Hough and Diego Boneta, are very good in their roles. Neither seem to be suffering from a lack of talent, which is refreshing. One minor concern is the continued underuse of Bryan Cranston. I am 100 percent certain that anyone who watches the first few episodes of his tv series, “Breaking Bad,” will have know doubt that he is one of the most talented actors working in the film/tv industry today. As shows like “Breaking Bad,” “Dexter,” “Game of Thrones,” and “Six Feet Under,” have shown us, there is some wonderful writing and acting going on on television these days, some which is as good as anything you would discover in a movie. Cranston’s talent is on display on every episode of “Breaking Bad,” and it astonishes me that his talent is not used more often in films. He was underused in the 2011 film, “Drive,” as well. Despite this, “Rock of Ages” is a good film. All of the performances are great and not forced. There is no overreaching for some extra bit of goofiness by any of the performers in the film. I believe it is understood that the humor in the film is in the premise of the film. It is a musical set in 1987 with all 1980’s songs used. That is why it is fun. It is not profound and thought-provoking. It does not try to be so and that’s ok. It’s just fun watching Tom Cruise, Alec Baldwin, and Paul Giamatti sing. The best musical number is one performed by Alec Baldwin and Russell Brand. You will know why. Malin Ackerman's hair is perfect in this film. She and Tom Cruise share another memorable scene which worked quite well for it's intention. See “Rock of Ages.” It is not overbearing and it does not overstay it's welcome. It's just a lot of fun.

You Will Beam With Joy at "Moonrise Kingdom"

Wes Anderson’s latest film, “Moonrise Kingdom” follows in his ability to create his own unique world in which the action of his films take place. In Anderson’s films, the viewer is taken to an alternate world. This world is similar to our own, however, there are enough unique things present in his world to make it quite appealing and makes for a wonderful setting for his films. “Moonrise Kingdom” takes place somewhere off the coast of the Northeastern United States. We are never told exactly where the location is, however, we do know that it takes place on some fictional islands including New Penzance. The locations are beautiful. They look similar to the coast of New England. The closing credits thank some government authorities in Rhode Island, so it is possible it was filmed there. The story involves two young people who have developed a friendship through the miracle of letter-writing. The film takes place in 1965, so, as some of us may remember, letter-writing and calling on the phone were the only means of communication back then and into the early 90’s. The youngsters in question are Suzy (Kara Hayward) and Sam (Jared Gilman). Neither of these actors, according to IMDB, which is as good a source as any without having access to Wes Anderson or the actors themselves, had ever acted in anything before this film! Hayward and Gilman are fantastic in this film! I will repeat. Hayward and Gilman are fantastic in this film! I had no idea that they were new to acting. There is absolutely nothing in their performances to indicate that they are novices. The film is theirs. Most of the screen time is devoted to these two outstanding young actors and this was, I am sure, an intentional choice. The supporting cast includes very good performances by Bruce Wilis, Bill Murray, Frances McDormand, Harvey Keitel, and Edward Norton. It is clear that the film is all about the two young leads. Their performances are exceptional. The film is not a kid’s film, nor does it make an attempt to be so. At the same time, it would be a great film for young adults to see. There is nothing in the film to offend anyone or attack anyone’s paper-thin sensibilities. The relationship that Suzy and Sam develop throughout the course of the film is natural and a false note is never detected. As usual, Anderson places objects of the era in the film. For example, Suzy carries around with her a children’s record player, like the ones kids who grew up in the 60’s and 70’s may have had. She carries with her her favorite record as well. You may recall in Anderson’s “The Royal Tenenbaums,” the closet full of vintage board games from the 1960’s and 1970’s. Even though a dialogue scene takes place, at one point, in this closet, I could not help looking at all of the many board games that were intentionally onscreen. There is not as much of that in “Moonrise Kingdom.” There is, however, the same amount of appeal that will satisfy fans of Anderson’s other films (Rushmore, The Life Aquatic, and the before mentioned Royal Tenenbaums). The characters in Anderson’s films are somewhat flawed, but not so much that they are unlikable. Anderson knows just the right style of acting to get from his actors so they mesh with his vision and match the specific scenes in his films. Such is the case, as I have highlighted in this exceptionally well-written piece, with the characters of Suzy and Sam in “Moonrise Kingdom.” I always enjoy a well-written and well-acted film more than a loud, in your face action film. As with Jell-O, there is always room for a good action film, such as “The Avengers” or Liam Neeson’s film, “Taken,” however, the most fun I glean at the movies is from witnessing wonderful writing and acting. I have avoided describing much of the plot of the film, mostly because it is a relatively simple story and I would hate to give much away. Simplicity, in this case, does not mean pedestrian. It just means that to outline the plot of the film would take away from your future enjoyment of discovering what happens in the film. Plus, isn’t a dissection of the plot of the film the most boring part of a movie review? To me it is. So there. Go see it. “Moonrise Kingdom” is fantastic! Don’t let the sun go down on you before seeing “Moonrise Kingdom.”

Turn The Other Cheek to "Vigilante."

The 1983 film, “Vigilante” is exactly what you might expect with that title. Robert Forster plays Eddie Marino, a man whose wife and child are killed by a gang of street thugs. A group of citizens who are sick and tired of street violence and police indifference to said violence acts alone in cleaning the streets. This group is led by the great Fred Williamson, a veteran of many exploitation films, including several of the Italian variety, including the awesome, “1990: The Bronx Warriors.” After the man accused of killing Eddie Marino’s wife and child is sentenced to a mere two years in prison, Marino expresses his frustration about the justice system in the courtroom and is convicted to one month in prison for his outburst. During his one month in prison, Marino gets roughed up and is befriended by a fellow prisoner played by the older, but still physically impressive Rake (Woody Strode). One of the coolest scenes in the film involves Rake, so watch out for it. After Marino is released from prison, he is ready,with the help of Nick (Fred Williamson) and his group to kick some ass. If you go into this film ready to watch some ass-kicking, you will be pleased with the result, however, to my surprise, there was not as much ass-kicking as I thought there might be. The film is a bit more subdued than I thought. This works to the film’s advantage as it does not focus on the violence, either of the gang members/thugs or of the vigilante group. The story focuses more on what was perceived at the time as indifference and inaction of big city police departments to respond to violent crime. The inaction of the police in the film is the catalyst for all of the unfortunate things that happen to Marino’s family.

I liked Robert Forster’s quiet, subdued performance as Marino. I also enjoyed Fred Williamson’s performance as the no-nonsense leader of the citizen vigilante group who helps Forster enact his revenge. “Vigilante” is a very straight-forward film. It does not waste time with any extraneous elements. There are no subplots involving a love triangle, a romantic backstory, or anything else that would derail the action. One does not usually begin watching the dvd of such films wanting to be embroiled in a tired story of failed romance. One thing “Vigilante” does well, however, it was probably not by design, though it may have been, was to make the audience understand the gravity of what has happened to Marino’s family without beating the audience over the head with extra scenes of the family having a great time or showing how cutesy the child is at being cute. These kinds of scenes are usually unnecessary and are often present in weak scripts. The audience does not need to be reminded of the cuteness of the child to be enraged at the fact that street vermin has committed murder. There is one scene that introduces Marino and his wife and child to the audience. They are at a park playing. They are having fun and Marino loves his wife. The scene is brief and the point is made. That is all that is needed. The poster for "Vigilante" is a tad misleading, as it leads one to believe that the focus of the film is a street gang. This is not the case. The focus of the film, as you have, by now, gathered, is the story of Eddie Marino and his desire for justice. I am not a big revenge movie fan, however, when made well, such as is the case with “Vigilante,” they can be quite rousing. Another revenge film which is very exciting is the recent Liam Neeson film, “Taken.” “Taken” is fantastic and never stops for any superfluous bullshit. Nor does “Vigilante.” William Lustig (“Maniac,” “Maniac Cop”) directs “Vigilante” with fast-moving precision, while, in the quick pace of the film, allows for the story to unfold coherently and allows for sympathy to be gained for the character of Marino. Seek out the dvd of “Vigilante” and turn both cheeks towards it.

A Fine Cast in Dark Shadows

The best part of Tim Burton’s “Dark Shadows” is the performance of Johnny Depp as Barnabas Collins, a member of the Collins family of Maine who is awakened after lying in a coffin, imprisoned, for 196 years until a “yellow dragon” awakens him from his slumber. I have never seen an episode of the 1968-72 television series upon which this film is based. I consider that a good thing so I could go into the film fresh without any expectations. I did know the film was going to be a comedy. The trailers for the film allow for no mistake to be made in that regard.

I was pleasantly surprised at how much I enjoyed “Dark Shadows.” Now, I do not think it is a great film, however, it is a good, surprisingly subdued film. I am not a huge Tim Burton fan, so I was a bit hesitant to see this film. I am glad I did, as I enjoyed a fantastic performance by Johnny Depp. He is not as overbearingly over-the-top as he was in “Pirates of the Caribbean.” The best thing about Depp’s performance in “Dark Shadows” is that his portrayal of Collins is not one of bumbling stupidity or the typical “fish out of water” scenario. Collins, who emerges in 1972 from his imprisonment, though thrown into a completely different time period from what he knew, is able to quickly adjust to his new surroundings and lead the Collins family towards regaining their once proud name. In fact, once adjusting to his new life, Barnabas Collins’ focus is on reclaiming the town of Collinwood as his family’s own. He does this not for personal gain, but for family pride. This is a very wise choice by the screenwriter. There are plenty of opportunities for goofiness, stupidity, and other unnecessary tomfoolery, however, thankfully, the film, only briefly on one occasion strays into such territory. You will know that occasion when you hear the Barry White song. That is a goofy, but thankfully, brief scene. The rest of the cast is fine supporting Depp. Michelle Pfeiffer, is always pleasant to see…and is still pleasant to look at, I do not mind saying. Pfeiffer plays Elizabeth Collins Stoddard, a how ever many great-greats, relative of Barnabas Collins. She lives in the run-down, but still ornate, Collins mansion with her husband, Roger (Jonny Lee Miller), their daughter, Carolyn (Chloe Grace Moritz), and their son David (Gulliver McGrath). Also living in the house are caretaker of the mansion, Willie Loomis (the great Jackie Earle Haley), and Dr. Julia Hoffman (Helena Bonham Carter). Dr. Hoffman has been employed to treat David, who is thought to have some psychological dysfunction. “Dark Shadows” is a pleasant film, mostly thanks to Johnny Depp’s excellent performance. Again, there are few bumps in the road as far as the screenplay goes. The played for laughs romantic scene between Barnabas and business competitor, Angelique Brouchard (Eva Green), is a bit cringe-inducing as the good, but overused “You’re The First, The Last, My Everything” by Barry White plays on the soundtrack. We find out at the beginning of the film that Angelique is the woman who cursed Barnabas Collins to a life of imprisonment, the imprisonment from which he escapes thanks to the earlier referenced “yellow dragon.” The best part of the film is the frequent usage by Barnabas Collins of the old English used in the 1700’s. It is a typical trope used in films involving a character who has emerged in modern times. In “Dark Shadows,” this type of dialogue is fresh and Depp’s delivery of this dialogue is perfect. This dialogue of which I speak is a character in the film. As music can be sometimes a character in a film, the old English dialogue spoken by Barnabas in “Dark Shadows” is also a character, and a good one. Every time Depp’s Barnabas Collins appeared on screen I was happy. This is a very complimentary thing to say about an actor’s performance. The film took a tad too long to wrap up, as is a trend in big-budget Hollywood films these days. The finale of the film is heavily CGI-laden and my mind numbs at such heavy usage of CGI. Despite that, however, I recommend Tim Burton’s “Dark Shadows,” for Johnny Depp’s wonderful performance and his dialogue delivery. Anyone who fancies themselves a lover of language will likely enjoy the film for his line reading. Go forth into the dark shadows and see it or the yellow dragon will swallow you whole.

Let in Visitor Q

Takashi Miike’s 2001 film “Visitor Q” is what many people would consider a difficult and uncomfortable film to watch, however, I welcome such films. Films such as “Visitor Q” challenge the audience to shun the conformity found in most Hollywood films. Strange people such as myself gravitate towards films like this, not because of the content or what the film may be about, but rather, because we know we are in for a different film experience from what is common. Let me stress that though “Visitor Q” would be considered an extreme film with scenes that would shock many, it is not because of such scenes that I appreciate such films. Take a film like David Mamet’s “Oleanna.” Just take it. There you go. Trust me, it is great! Another film that is not shocking or disturbing, but is unique is “The Music of Chance.” It does not follow the normal conventions of filmmaking, yet it manages to tell a concise, coherent story through the usage of a great script and wonderful performances.

Films that are unique and offer the audience something different are the kinds of films to which I gravitate, it does not matter to me what genre a particular film falls into. “Jim, the World’s Greatest” is a normal film about a young adult which does not pander to the audience. It does not treat the audience as simpletons who need to see stuff get exploded or see kids throwing up on an out of control Ferris wheel. The unique films of which I write are oftentimes very smart films as well. “Visitor Q” offers up the story, which we learn throughout the course of the film, of a young man who ends up staying at the home of a man, his wife, and their son. Nobody knows exactly who this young man is or what he wants. He just is there. This may sound familiar, as the 2010 film “Hesher,” follows a similar premise. This is the only similarity between the two films. “Hesher” is a great film, but it does not go to the bizarre lengths that one finds in “Visitor Q.” I do not want to give too much away, as “Visitor Q” can be obtained from Netflix and many of the strange elements of the film are key ingredients of the story. Basically, through a series of strange events, which are graphically depicted in the film, a family goes from very dysfunctional to a more nurturing, caring family. It is like “Hesher,” but a lot more extreme, graphic, scattological, and not lactose-intolerant. Miike’s film does appear to have a point as you may understand once it concludes. I believe I understood the point of the film. This strange man, known only as the visitor (Kazushi Watanabe) ends up in a family’s home, witnesses and does some bizarre things, and in the end, somehow assists the family into a better life for themselves. Explaining better than that would begin to give too much away and I prefer not to do that should anyone reading this may seek out this film. The only other Takashi Miike film I have seen is the 1999 film, “Audition.” “Visitor Q” is stranger than “Audition,” so if that was too much for you to take, you may want to skip “Visitor Q.” However, if you enjoy challenging films that are not afraid to be graphic, while still able to tell an interesting story and not just being gross for the sake of being gross, then queue up “Visitor Q.” Let him stay for awhile. If you don’t like him, you can always kick him out. He will not say much about it.