Review of The Expendables 2 (2012)

The Expendables 2 (2012) is an ensemble action/adventure/…action film, a sequel to The Expendables.

Directed by Simon West (Con Air (1997), The Mechanic (2011)).

Written by Richard Wenk (16 Blocks (2006), Vamp (1986)), Sylvester Stallone (F.I.S.T (1978), The Expendables (2010)) and others.

Starring: Sylvester Stallone, Jason Statham, Dolph Lundgren, Terry Crews, Randy Couture, Chuck Norris, Jean-Claude Van Damme, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Bruce Willis, Jet Li, Liam Hemsworth, Nan Yu and others.

This is a movie made specifically for me. When I was growing up, most of these guys were my idols. They were my favourite actors, not because they were good actors, but because they’re bulging muscles and sweaty, snarling faces made me believe in superheroes, people, who could machine gun entire hordes of bad guys down, while standing in plain sight and not take one bullet. And then face off with the main baddie, who was really bad and after killing him, spit out some cheesy one-liner. I looked up to them, I felt protected by them. We approached the 2000’s and soon these guys went away. I was left with action stars, that looked like male models.

I couldn’t be the only person who felt disappointed. Sure, I like good acting now, but seeing Arnie jam an enormous drill into a guy, while screaming “SCREW YOU!” was something that I missed seeing in movies. And I really wasn’t the only person. When I was a kid, I would have never imagined a movie like this possible, but two years back, Stallone answered my childhood prayers and made The Expendables. If you think I could ever have enough of this you’re insane. So did I like The Expendables 2? Of course, I did.

I mean, it is NOT a good movie. The dialogue is bad, the one-liners stupid, acting silly, plot simple, action over-the-top and so on. But, this also describes most of the action movies with these guys that I loved. This is what I wanted and this is what I got. There’s no use in describing the plot, there’s nothing really specific about it, mostly coming down to Expendables shooting people and blowing shit up.

The best parts were the call-backs and references and self-aware humor. Willis and Arnold are in the movie a lot more as well, even Chuck Norris, who has maybe the smallest part does get more than one appearance. Jet Li is in the movie only for the first action scene, though and Rourke doesn’t appear at all. My favourite was definitely Dolph Lundgren, who is more of the comic-relief character here, which is interesting, since I think I liked him the most in the first one as well, when he played an asshole. They added some younger/newer faces, like Nan Yu and Liam Hemsworth, but in all the testosterone provided by the rest of the cast they got lost and forgettable.

The action is insane, but pretty well choreographed and mostly practical effects, except for additional CG gore and the more complex effects scenes. The movie opens with an action scene that is just crazy violent and over-the-top. Stallone takes down a helicopter by “driving” a bike into it. And the movie rarely slows down after that. There’s not much to say about it, except that you should know what to expect going into it.

Overall, more funny and entertaining than the first one, if you want no holds barred, balls to the wall action with some real gory mayhem and puns, if you grew up with 80’s action hero movies, definitely recommended.

Pictured: Irony, as the one who is supposedly the most bad-ass of them all, is the only one who looks and sounds like some maintenance guy.

 

Review of The Lords of Flatbush (1974)

The Lords of Flatbush (1974) also known as The Lord’s of Flatbush (1974) is a low-budget drama/romance/comedy film about a street gang in Brooklyn.

Directed by Martin Davidson (Looking for an Echo (2000), Hero at Large (1980)) and Stephen Verona (Pipe Dreams (1976), Talking Walls (1987)).

Written by Stephen Verona (Boardwalk (1979)), Gayle Gleckler, Martin Davidson (If Ever I See You Again (1978)) and Sylvester Stallone.

Starring: Perry King, Sylvester Stallone, Henry Winkler, Paul Mace, Susan Blakely, Maria Smith and others.

Of course my main reason for watching this film was that it’s one of Sylvester Stallone’s earliest roles, two years before his big break with my favourite movie of all time – Rocky.

The movie, I suppose, is set sometime in the late 1950’s as Stallone is a member of a small gang, consisting of four greasers in leather jackets, slicked back hair and low intelligence. And they’re all going to school together, even though none of them look like they’ve been high schoolers for the last 10 years. One of the gang members is played by Henry Winkler, who went on to play his most well-known role as another 50’s greaseball in the sitcom Happy Days.

The soundtrack is really good, which is remarkable, because getting rights probably wasn’t so easy, considering the film’s budget. Although in one scene they really fucked up and put a song with lyrics under a dialogue, so I couldn’t make out what the characters were saying.

Sly looks already really beefy in this, even before Death Race 2000, so I guess he didn’t have to put on much weight for Rocky.

The style is well done, although it has more of a 70’s low-budget movie feel, which contradicts my perception of 50’s. One chick wears hair rolls for most of the movie, I wonder if that was considered cool back then? I’m not a car guy, but there are some beautiful cars.

Interestingly there doesn’t seem to be a lead here, the four guys have more or less equal parts. They each have their own fairly interesting troubles, one is talented and smart, but is wasting his time, another can’t choose between girls and dreams of going away after school, another one is getting married and the fourth one I don’t even remember. But what they all share is being not very likable, they are a bunch of insecure jerks, hiding behind their macho facades, bullying people around them. This for me made it hard to identify with any of them.

The movie has a lot of flaws, but as far as the performances go, they are pretty decent, Sly shows some of his acting chops in a weird scene on a roof, by his character’s pigeon coop.

They try to make the dialogue realistic, but it just comes across as clumsy, when a lot of times it consists of the characters not saying things and just silently fidgeting. Yes, often teenagers do act this way, but it isn’t very entertaining to watch.

It really seems to suffer from it’s low-budget, I think it was supposed to be a fun coming of age flick like American Graffiti, but at times it’s depressing and painfully dull.

Overall, it is an odd coming of age film, that’s not very entertaining, has a nice, satisfying and uplifting ending, but it isn’t really earned. Mostly not a good movie, not recommended, unless you’re really interested in early Stallone’s work.

"Lord's of Flatbush? What? It doesn't make sense!"
"Oh, yeah we got another symbol for free, we weren't going to waste it!"

Review of Death Race 2000 (1975)

Death Race 2000 (1975) – is a sci-fi/action/dark comedy film,  based on the short story The Racer by Ib Melchior.

Directed by Paul Bartel (Eating Raoul (1982), Cannonball! (1976)), a moderately successful low-budget director.

Written by Robert Thom (Wild in the Streets (1968), Bloody Mama (1970)) and Charles B. Griffith (The Little Shop of Horrors (1960), The Wild Angels (1966)).

Starring: David Carradine, Sylvester Stallone, Simone Griffeth, Martin Kove, Mary Woronov, John Landis and others.

Essentially the movie is just about this racing event that takes place in a dystopian future (well, not now, because it is set in the year 2000) America, where it is just about the greatest form of entertainment there is and the society has degraded and have so little regard for human life that they watch an event, where contestants are awarded points if they run over people, the more vulnerable the target the better, so you should watch out for people in wheelchairs, they’re the bullseye.

This is basically The Running Man of the 70’s, so yeah, it’s over-the-top and cheesy, but in the good way. It has B-movie cult classic written all over it. It comments on the similar themes about entertainment, the game-show culture, the violence on TV, but it also attacks one specific group of people – the NASCAR fans. I think it’s no secret that a lot of people who watch it, really expect the cars to crash at some point, that has become in some ways  more interesting than the winner of the race, but it’s just human nature, even if we acknowledge it intellectually, there’s something emotionally that wants the thrill of it. It is questionable how surely the movie walks the line of satire without falling into condoning the characters.

Most fun was watching Sylvester Stallone playing a constantly spitting and screaming asshole. He overacts so ridiculously it becomes very entertaining. And then he also ass-rapes a construction worker with a huge sword mounted on his car. And he punches a woman and then strangles a woman and then has his ass handed to him by David Carradine, who despite his comical S&M gimp outfit is still pretty cool. It briefly features a young Martin Kove.

The movie’s low budget is rather apparent, the cars look really cheap and cheesy, there’s almost no attempt to make anything look even slightly futuristic or just not  70’s, TV reporters have microphones, that strongly resemble sex toys, not even slightly realistic matte paintings and so on, but that just adds to the reasons why people enjoy movies like this.

I must give credit to the racing scenes. Those Fast And Furious guys could learn a thing or two about car racing movies, because I was a lot more excited in this than in any of those movies, where Paul Walker refuses to act.

Overall, I found it quite enjoyable. Recommended for B-movie genre fans or if you want to see Sly’s early work as long as you don’t take it seriously, because the filmmakers clearly didn’t.

Sly will tommygun the shit out of you (if you don’t get sword-raped in the ass instead)