Chuck Norris Fact: He fought the Devil once and won

HELLBOUND (1994)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

There is a special place reserved in Hell for movies made about demons and the Devil's emissaries. I am thinking this place is called "The Rental Bin of Disastrous Devil Movies Near the River Styx." Styx, by the way, is the river crossed by dead souls on the way to Hades, according to Greek Myth. I rather see a film about that than a Chuck Norris action vehicle crossed with long-haired demons who were banished by Richard the Lionhearted.

Chuck Norris is the typical stone-faced cop that he had overplayed throughout the 1980's. Calvin Levels is his ostensibly smart-mouthed partner who never says anything remotely smart-mouthed (when he waxes on about the Chicago Bulls, well, that is about as smart-mouthed as he gets). The two cops travel to Israel on the taxpayers' dime to find a killer who is actually Satan's emissary. Throw in some tomfoolery regarding a street urchin, depressingly few karate fights with Norris kicking butt, a leading lady and vastly underused love interest for Norris (played by Sheree Wilson, who would later grace her presence on TV's "Walker: Texas Ranger" that also starred Norris), a candlelit monastery and hokey special-effects and you've got grade-D Cannon fodder.

Christopher Neame is the demon who pretends to be some sort of antiquities expert. His voice becomes deeper and his eyes turn green when he is either threatened or ready to sacrifice a woman of royal blood to Satan. Why royal? No explanation is given. Why does the demon engage in hand-to-hand combat with Norris when all he has to do is use his supernatural powers to thwart the Chicago cop? Can't say.

"Hellbound" is pure garbage that never exploits its central idea - it just assumes that a demon threatening you can be beaten by flying kicks. Hell has not been this boring since "Exorcist II."

Missing in Action 4: The Return of Chuck Norris (albeit briefly)

THE EXPENDABLES 2 (2012)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

I am all for big, dumb, explosive action porn. I am not a devotee of the today's "Fast and Furious" school of Excess but, I admit with reservations, there were some decent Golan-Globus pics back in the 80's and there are some decent ones nowadays. There were also some terrible ones in the last two decades that offered nothing more than assaulting your senses with brain-dead dialogue and various explosions. "The Expendables" was a return to the old Stallone/Schwarzenegger/Van Damme/Lundgren macho action pics with barechested, brawny G.I. Joe types whose heroism was defined by their body count. "Expendables 2" is virtually action movie porn with the emphasis on CGI-blood effects, machine gun fire, and lots of bareknuckle fights and more Digitally Magnified Thud Sounds. For some, this is enough. For me, the first film offered a tinge bit more.

The macho mercenary gang who are all full of sound and fury exchange gunfire right at the beginning of the film, during a rescue attempt of one of their captured mercernaries, Mr. Trench (Arnold Schwarzenegger). Sylvester Stallone, Jason Statham, Terry Crews, Jet Li, Dolph Lundgren and company are all on board, exchanging occasional quips and extreme bravado. Back home, Stallone welcomes a new member to the group, a young sniper named Billy the Kid (Liam Hemsworth) who wants to retire, and disapproves of another new member, Maggie Chan (Yu Nan), a technical expert who is handy with a weapon. Nan's Chan is the brightest spot of this bunch. Of course, old scores need to be settled as Stallone's G.I. Joe group are commissioned by Mr. Church (Bruce Willis), a CIA operative, to find a suitcase equipped with a computer that pinpoints the location of plutonium in a Russian abandoned mine. After we get precious little exposition, the gang finds themselves in Russia and smack in the middle of the evil arms dealer, Jean Vilain (Jean Claude Van Damme), who wants the computer. Vilain? Goodness me. I miss the days of clever villainous names like Ernst Stravos Blofeld.

I rather not give away too much of the hairline fracture of a plot except to say that one of the testosteroned members of the Expendables is killed and it becomes a revenge story. If only it were more fun and involving. There are shootings galore, knives thrust into bellies and heads and necks and various other body parts, bones crushed and broken and split in innumerable ways, several bareknuckle fights which go on longer than any realistic fight, and lots of machine gun fire. I mean RAT-A-TAT-TAT on overload. There is one sequence where Stallone, Schwarzenegger, Willis, Crews and even Chuck Norris fire one round after round in complete unison. And speaking of Norris, he plays Booker, a retired military operative who is practically a one-man army who materializes out of thin air - a deus ex machina for those raised on Golan-Globus action epics. Why are the Expendables needed if this guy can mow down hundreds of villainous minions and destroy a tank in a matter of seconds? Missing in Action, much?

I found Norris and Yu Nan to be the best thing about this empty-headed exercise in plotless brutality. The first "Expendables" was a no-brainer but a mildly fun excursion that eventually went into near-Michael-Bay extremes. However, it also had moments to pause for character reflection and Stallone, who wrote and directed the first film and is replaced as a director here by Simon West, included some real-life aspects of war and torture to give it more of a spin. Here, this is all brawn and action dramatics dialed up to 111. The heroes, including the usually dynamic Jason Statham, are virtually indistinguishable from each other. Fight, kill, maim, destroy and laugh about it in the process with, ironically, no real trace of humor or character definition. 1984's "Missing in Action" at least contained a little more restraint.

Relationships are no picnic

FIVE MOMENTS OF INFIDELITY (2006)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

It is always gratifying to know that all major cities, countries and continents around the world share the same problems with relationships, including the city of Melbourne in Australia. The means by which someone cheats is hinted at in "Five Moments of Infidelity," though the film aims to be more than a parable of infidelity.

In the opening scene, we see Narelle (Sally McDonald) in bed with another man, Billy (Kirk Westwood). Nothing too shocking about that yet our initial impression is that these two are lovebirds, signaling the beginning of a new relationship. We find out that Narelle, a secretary, is indeed in love with the new man in her life, though he turns out to be a womanizer and "loves" her but is not in love, despite allowing her access to his apartment.

Then there is the gay couple, Danny (Jason Chong) and Mitchel (Joshua Cameron), who love to party and have seemingly agreed to having an "open" relationship. Danny, however, is not keen on it - maybe he loves the idea of pursuing another man but not necessarily to have sex with and destroy what he has (presumably, fidelity also springs from having to live in the same roof).

Jacinta (Holly Sinclair) is the innocent teenager who hates her alcoholic mother (Annie Jones). This conflicted, dysfunctional family unit is like something out of an episode of "East Enders," and perhaps the harshest in this string of infidelity episodes. The father (Brett Swain) has the toughest time putting up with a series of shouting matches between mother and daughter so, yes, a psychiatrist is needed for this family. Paging Dr. Phil!

Hard-working Anthony (Alex Papps) and his long-suffering wife, Vicki (Amanda Douge), have a tougher time making love - he is so stressed and blames work. Vicki has had enough of masturbating in the shower - she pursues a man and actively seeks some human contact. Who can blame her for being simply horny.

Last but not least is the strange dynamic between another hard-working man, Hayden (John Sheedy), and his terminally annoying and annoyed and downright fed-up American girlfriend, Brittney (Charmaine Gorman). She hates when Hayden goes to parties by himself, hates it when he doesn't call or show up at a more convenient time, yet sometimes she doesn't mind and loves him. It is not unreasonable to expect Hayden to seek interests elsewhere since this woman is always having a crying fit and can drive someone quite mad.

First-time writer-director Kate Gorman weaves these infidelity tales with ease. There is almost never a wasted moment - every scene feels true to the characters' dilemnas. Some characters, such as Vicki and Hayden, feel more realistically portrayed than others but generally Gorman does an admirable job of handling this Altmanesque narrative. In fact, some of the characters' denouements are left open-ended, making one wonder what will happen next in their lives. Though these episodes often smacks of British melodrama, on the order of East Enders, it is at times quite sharply written and directed. And the dysfunctional family unit has its own issues of faith and fidelity to family - it is the most emotionally wrenching tale of them all with the tragic, memorable beauty of the lost soul, Jacinta.

My feeling on "Five Moments of Infidelity" is that it has a groove and either you are in harmony with it or you are not. The characters have a measure of depth to their personalities and they do grow on you, even the gay couple who are given less screen time than anyone else. Sometimes working hard at your job and bringing flowers for your loved ones or significant others is not enough to repair the emotional work one must put out. "Five Moments of Infidelity" shows how hard it is have a relationship that works.

Eat some Apocalyptic Animal Crackers

ARMAGEDDON (1998)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

(Originally viewed in 1998)

"Armageddon" is one of the guiltiest pleasures of my reviewing career - an obscenely loud, unnecessarily expensive, fairly exciting, often hysterical action film about meteors crashing down on Earth, notably New York City (the city of much apocalyptic destruction, pre-and-post-9/11). 

One obscenely huge asteroid, the size of a small country, is about to crash down on Earth and destroy it. Billy Bob Thornton, in the movie's best performance, is the laconic NASA official who decides the best plan of defense is to hire...oil drillers (!) to stop the deadly asteroid by a rather odd and impossibly complicated plan - drilling a hole through its center and planting a nuclear bomb. Huh? Oh, yeah, and detonate it but naturally there has to be a sacrifice. Hey, it's only a movie, especially when the oil drillers are played by Bruce Willis, Ben Affleck, Michael Clarke Duncan and the hilarious Steve Buscemi. Oh, and there's Liv Tyler as Willis's daughter, but the less said about her, the better - Animal Crackers notwithstanding.

"Armageddon" is silly, fast-paced, overlong, junky, nonsensical moviemaking with more cuts and fast-moving camera angles per second than ten Martin Scorsese movies cobbled together (no other director matches Michael Bay for trying to outdo what Irwin Allen had done with "Towering Inferno" and "The Poseidon Adventure," for starters. I did say try). The idea is to give you a migraine the size of an asteroid, not to entertain you. I admit I was entertained. Still, this type of plotless stupidity has its limitations in an overworked genre. Don't see it more than once.

Look 'menacing'

AMERICAN MOVIE (1999)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

For anyone interested in the sheer level of desperation that a low-budget filmmaker sinks to, it would be wise for you to check out "American Movie." Not only does this documentary deal with the depths of desperation in filmmaking but also with the anxiety of trying to complete a project.

Mark Borchardt is such a filmmaker. His intent is to finish production on his short horror film, "Coven," so he can find the necessary budget to shoot "Northwestern," the story of his upbringing in Menomonee Falls, Wisconsin. It takes Mark more than three years to complete "Coven" (this is often the case with most filmmakers making short film debuts).

There are many funny and painfully difficult scenes in "American Movie" but its humor almost turns Mark into a walking buffoon, bereft of intelligence. Actually, I do think he is smart and knowledgeable (who can mock someone who equally loves "The Seventh Seal" and "Night of the Living Dead"?). Mark sometimes gives erroneous direction (he tells a group of masked actors to look "menacing"), and he is impatient with details in production. He also argues with his ex-girlfriend, and mounts several overdue credit card bills (as do most people).

"American Movie" doesn't just explore the fringes of filmmaking - it is also the profile of a 30-year-old man with aspirations to make it to the top. He works odd jobs, including a mausoleum and delivering the Wall Street Journal. Basically, we are talking about a poor Midwesterner who pays child support and plunders his discouraged Uncle Bill's bank account to finance his film. His friends and family are not very supportive, though they clearly see his ambition, his drive, his willingness to commit to making the film he wants to make. This is what drives "American Movie" forward with gusto and will mostly likely inspire other filmmakers who are faced with the common hardships of low-budget filmmaking. Mark is a role model for other filmmakers to follow, and "American Movie" comes as close to understanding the grass roots of filmmaking as any other.

The Boys' Testosterone is Back!

THE EXPENDABLES (2010)

Reviewed By Jerry Saravia

It is too late for me to give career advice to Sylvester Stallone, and why would I? He made a gentle, noble, awe-inspiring move when he brought back Rocky Balboa in 2006, and it did some solid box-office business. He also brought back Rambo in 2008, and that move was ill-advised. "The Expendables" is Stallone in full action-movie splendor with enough explosions and occasionally one-liners crossed with killer machismo to keep most action fans happy. It is not great nor is it a good movie, but it is just a slap-happy, delirious picture with plenty of violence and no real brains.

Giving the plot away of movie like this is counterproductive since there are no big twists or revelations. A group of buddy-buddy mercenaries led by Stallone get a 5 million dollar offer to overthrow a Latin American dictator (from the island of Vilena) who is actually controlled by an ex-CIA agent played by Eric Roberts. That is it, the plot hanging by a rusty fingernail in a mortar shell.

Stallone, who wrote and directed, assembles this movie like a throwback to the old Golan-Globus action pics of the 1980's. Veteran Dolph Lundgren is surprisingly solid as one drug-addled mercenary who has more than a few screws loose. There are also brief cameos by Bruce Willis and Arnold Schwarzenegger who are so vividly exciting to watch that you wish the movie had more of them (they do appear in the sequel). Mickey Rourke is on hand as Tool, the tattoo artist, who has one very gripping scene that is at odds with the level of EXTREME machismo of these musclebound heroes. Other than these old reliable pros, we get newbies like Terry Crews (playing a character named Hale Caesar), Jet Li, Jason Statham and more. Statham is the real breakout star of the new bunch - he's got style, panache and cunning wit.

Stallone sometimes looks bored out of his mind or just simply indifferent to the chaos around him. Other times, his energy level rises to 11 when he fires a weapon. I will give him credit for imbuing this film with political urgency in regards to waterboarding and Somali pirates - he has always tried to be relevant to the times. Overall, "The Expendables" is big, loud and extremely violent with many long bareknuckle fight scenes and lots of machine gun fire. Explosions are always delivered on cue, the fight scenes deliver every ounce of Digitally Magnified Thud Sounds when someone falls on their back or are thrown against a wall, and the arsenal of one-liners never wanes. These guys are strong cartoonish personalities that give the audience what they want. Oddly, these mercenaries are also lovesick puppies who are lonely and miserable - at least a couple of them seem to love women and want them to stand by. Deep down, though, they are more in love with sticking lustrous knives into the necks of their bloodsoaked enemies than making love. Sounds about right.

Not a 'Shining' example of a haunted house

THE AMITYVILLE HORROR (2005)

Reviewed by Jerry Saravia

I wish I could simplify and say this horror remake plainly bites the big one, or that it merely sucks. But brevity would be giving this movie some sort of undeserved status amongst fans of truly awful cinema. This 2005 remake of 1979's "The Amityville Horror" deserves better than a disposable, putrid version of "The Shining."

Laughably based on a true story by Jay Anson that has since been debunked time and again (and considering the real Lutzes objected to this remake), bearded George Lutz (Ryan Reynolds) and Kathy Lutz (Melissa George) move into a new, spacious house in good old Amityville for a bargain price. And, wouldn't you know, the realtor tells the Lutzes after making the sale that a series of murders, involving the DeFeo family, occurred in that house with the dreaded eye attic windows! Oh, my! Of course the parents don't tell their kids yet the youngest of the bunch sees the spirit of the murdered girl! And suddenly George gets headaches, bursts a blood vessel in his right eye, swings an axe with great abandon in front of his stepkids, and finds that the warmest place in the house is the basement. Incredibly, George Lutz appears nuttier than Jack Torrance.

This movie is so underwritten that we have to accept on faith that George owns a construction company because he drives a truck with the company's logo on it! Mostly, he mopes around the house and has an affinity for his motorboat. The wife does the shopping and takes care of the kids so you may ask, who the hell works in this household? The real story is that the Lutzes moved out of Amityville after 2 weeks, primarily because George was broke and couldn't afford the mortgage. Everything else about the "true story" is entirely suspect.

The original "Amityville Horror" was nothing special but it did contain a few chilling scenes. Remember the black ooze from the toilet? How about the Red Room? In this movie, there is only one moment that truly chills the bone. It involves the babysitter who frightens the kids with stories of the DeFeo family murders. The babysitter gets trapped in the closet and bangs the door until her knuckles bleed. We saw this in the original, too, but it is the only scare in this movie. Mostly we have the customary split-second cuts of blood-drenched demons (in this case, Native Americans), blood dripping from walls and not much more to distinguish it from the normal horror fare.

The house doesn't look ominous. The acting and frantic cuts are by the numbers. There is no sense of atmosphere or location or even a population in town (if this is Amityville, it shouldn't look like Nowheresville). And poor Philip Baker Hall as the priest is clearly in it for the paycheck. Everyone else should have taken the warning from the house's ghosts: Get out!