Haunted Mansion (2003)

 

Hello! The world’s most inconsistent blogger is back. And when I say inconsistent...oh boy. The last time I did this was 2021. Yikes! 

Another author recently asked if I was going to update my blog and that got me thinking it was high time I did. So, here I am.

We’ll see how long I keep this going. I’ve been busy turning out book after book (none of them under my own name), but I think I can find time to throw out some reviews.

And with it being Spooky Season, what better way to start than 2003’s Haunted Mansion? Also, I watched it this very morning. So, let’s dive right in…

This isn’t a bad movie. But it isn’t a great movie. I remember seeing it upon its initial home video release. I’d forgotten so much, though, except for the mausoleum scene (more on that in a minute).

While the film didn’t have a stellar reputation when it hit theaters, its assessment has improved upon undergoing a sort of re-evaluation among fans. And rightfully so.

This is hardly the bomb it was made out to be back in the early 2000s.

Eddie Murphy is typical Eddie Murphy, and it largely works—though it is evident this is in that career lull between peek Eddie and comeback Eddie. The rest of the cast is pretty good, but all-in-all, the dialogue is hokey. In fact, that was my biggest complaint when re-watching it.

Also, it is very much a product of its time. While the CGI was probably pretty amazing back in 2003, it doesn’t hold up well now. But it isn’t fair to judge the film based on that. It did the best it could with what it had, but old-school practical effects probably would have been more effective.

It seems to be that way for me—practical effects can hold up years after a movie is produced! But the early days of CGI look cheap and extremely dated now.

In fact, watching this with a modern lens almost gave it a made-for-Disney Channel vibe. Those effects just look so TV-ish. But I’m sure at the time they played as very theatrical.

Okay, now onto what I really liked…

I didn’t remember much about this picture except that aforementioned mausoleum scene. And I’m happy to say it holds up well! That set piece was still the best part for me. It’s creepy. Not scary, of course, but atmospheric and fun. I can see how it would give younger viewers a genuine fright. And the set design is phenomenal! If you enjoy old tombs covered in spiderwebs, flickering torches, and corpses rising from the grave—and I sure as Halloween do!—then you’ll find a lot to love here.

Overall, this isn’t a bad little movie. It would be a terrific Halloween watch for the younger crowd. For adults who love the ride on which it’s based, it is fun, too. (Though I do wish it felt more like the ride, if that makes any sense. Sometimes I forgot I was even watching a movie based upon the attraction because the tie-ins were pretty thin.)

While I prefer the Haunted Mansion film that was produced twenty years after this one, 2003’s version is still a good time.

Final verdict: 3.5 out of 5 stars for me. A solid but ultimately forgettable watch.

Western Movie Gunfights

The end of one year and the start of another usually signals awards season in the film industry. Long story short, it’s the time of year when the studios roll out their Oscar contenders. It’s also when most of the movies I don’t care about are released. I’ve never forgiven the Academy for their Smokey and the Bandit snub back in ’77, so I generally boycott the ceremony. But, that won’t stop me from handing out a few awards myself. So, let’s talk Western gunfights. It isn’t an Oscar or Golden Globe category, but it sure should be.
Best Gunfight In a Classic Western
This one, for me, goes hands down to Gunfight at the O.K. Corral. This film is one of my all-time favorites. The final battle between the Earp faction and the Clantons is one of the greatest gunfights ever filmed. True, it isn’t historically accurate in the least. But, it’s a darn good firefight. The climactic struggle is wonderfully filmed by my personal favorite director, John Sturges. It’s tense, action packed, and the perfect pay-off to a wonderful film. To see how the director’s perspective changed in ten years or so, watch Hour of the Gun. That version of the famous O.K. Corral fight is much different, but equally as effective.
Best Gunfight in a Modern Western
Open Range. Need I say more? Wonderfully choreographed and superbly filmed, the gunfight in Open Range is top notch. There’s only one gunfight in the whole movie, but it’s well worth the wait! Once the shooting starts, it goes on for about twenty minutes. That gunfight, and a whole host of other reasons, is why Open Range is on my top ten list of best movies ever made.
Most Realistic Gunfight
I’ll have to go with the final showdown in 2008’s Appaloosa. It’s quick. In fact, the first time I saw the film I was a bit disappointed. The shooting was over so fast. The whole movie just didn’t do a lot for me. The second time I saw it, I enjoyed it. Third time, I loved it. It’s now one of my favorite films.  But back to that gunfight…
I imagine that’s how Old West gunfights were (when they actually occurred): sudden and quick bursts of violence. Forget long, drawn-out fights with folks taking cover behind wagons or on top of buildings and all that. In Appaloosa, guns are drawn, used, and folks die. Plain and simple. Effective. One of the best.
Most Poignant Gunfight
Can a gunfight be poignant? I think so. And the award has to go to John Wayne’s final fight in The Shootist. Such a great movie, and such a great gunfight! It’s a film I enjoy more with each viewing. As far as the gunfight goes, it’s a bittersweet affair. We get to see some good cowboy action shooting as we say goodbye to a legend. If you haven’t seen the film, I highly recommend it. And if you’re one who believes John Wayne couldn’t act, watch The Shootist. In my opinion, his role in it was far more Oscar worthy than True Grit. But, that’s just my take, of course.
Honorable Mentions
My favorite film of all time, El Dorado, has some great gunfights (the scene where Wayne and company chase assailants into an old church and then finally into a saloon is probably my favorite sequence ever captured on film). The Professionals also contains some great scenes of western gunplay. Finally, the train shoot-out near the end of How the West Was Won is pretty amazing. I enjoy that whole film a great deal.
Biggest Let Down
I’m going to take some heat for this one. Don’t get me wrong, I love this movie. It’s a classic. It’s amazing. But the final gunfight in Shane was a bit disappointing to me. We  go the whole movie hearing hints of just how awesome Shane is with a gun. We also know Jack Palance has it coming. But the gunfight itself isn’t much. A couple of shots. A few seconds. It’s over pretty quickly. I suppose the film makes up for it with a great fistfight mid-way through. That being said, I still love Shane.
Please feel free to leave comments with your favorite western movie gunfights. I’d enjoy hearing from y’all!

Film Review: Bone Tomahawk

Y’all, I don’t even know where to start with this movie. First of all, let me say that I think it is a very well-made film. The dialogue is excellent, the pacing spot on, and visuals are stunning. S. Craig Zahler may be a first time filmmaker, but nothing about this picture says “amateur.” In fact, it is expertly crafted! The man should probably win an Academy Award (if not for directing, certainly for the writing—I can’t remember a recent movie that has such wonderful dialogue).

Like many good westerns, this is a slow burning film. The last thirty minutes or so are action packed. We’re talking edge of your seat type stuff. But until then we have time to really get to know the characters. That’s a good thing, because they’re aptly crafted. I particularly loved Deputy Chicory. I have no doubt Richard Jenkins should have won an Oscar for that role. Beyond Jenkins, the whole cast was stellar. Hey, it’s Kurt Russel in a western…you can’t beat that.

The action is adequately staged. Rather than large set pieces of major battles, we get tense, taut burst of violence. So, what’s my gripe with Bone Tomahawk? It’s savagely brutal. It’s not a huge spoiler to say the villains in this film are far from traditional. They’re cave dwelling cannibals (we find this out very early on, long before we actually see them).

Minor Spoilers Below…

We see a man split in two (this is after he’s scalped), and then consumed. Yep, that’s the level of violence we’re dealing with here. In perhaps the most disturbing part, viewers briefly see the women of the inbred cannibalistic tribe, pregnant, but amputated and blinded so they cannot escape. That didn’t sit well with me. It was effective, as I’m sure Zahler intended such a reaction. But it’s certainly not my cup of tea.

End Spoilers…

It has been described as a western-horror hybrid. However, I think it can be better described as traditional frontier tale that has a few horror elements. There is nothing supernatural in this film, and it does not fit into the “weird western” genre like Cowboys & Aliens. Some of the lines are outright funny, and there’s even some sentimental sweetness to it. A conversation regarding a flea circus is so well written, beautifully acted, and touching that one can't help but smile in the midst of all the carnage. Beyond this, the heroes are truly likable, and you’re rooting for them all the way.

Bone Tomahawk comes so close to being a perfect western! I almost added it to my cannon of classic oaters. In the end, the violence was just too off-putting for me. It’s too bad, though, as there’s a lot to love in this movie. James Reasoner recently reviewed the film, and he commented that he hopes S. Craig Zahler will try his hand at a more traditional western. I share those same sentiments. He darn near created a modern classic.

Film Review: Vacation

I don’t think it is hyperbole to call National Lampoon’s Vacation a classic. Nor do I feel it is an exaggeration to bestow such status upon National Lampoon’s Christmas Vacation. European and Vegas were passable, if not slightly forgettable, comedies. But if I had to sum up the new Vacation film with one word, it would be “disappointing.” Don’t get me wrong, the film isn’t horrible and perhaps the problem is with me; maybe I built the movie up too much and there was no way it could live up to my expectations. I’m a huge fan of the franchise and in my mind I figured it would be just like old times. There are some very funny parts! The two leads, played by Ed Helms and Christina Applegate, are likable and sympathetic. Some of the predicaments they find themselves in are hilarious. But then we come to their children: the oldest one is fine, but the youngest Griswold son is the epitome of obnoxious and almost ruined the movie for me in certain parts (the kid who plays him is a fine actor, but the character itself, as written, is the problem). He curses like a sailor and it got old for me in a hurry! There are some rare movies where excessive profanity adds to the humor. For example, The Heat uses its frequent foul language to set up several very funny gags (Smokey and the Bandit is an example of an older movie that does this effectively, too). But in Vacation I just didn’t find the cursing very funny. Perhaps it was supposed to be the gag, “Hey, this kid has a mouth that would make truckers blush,” but the gag completely misfired for me.

There were also several out-of-place references to one character’s political beliefs that had nothing to do with the plot. I don’t care if the filmmakers are liberal, conservative, or somewhere in the middle; just leave politics out of your pictures and dispense with the agenda. Maybe if the story had anything to do with politics it would have been different. But, as it is, it came across as completely needless.

Another issue I had was the film seemed to outstay its welcome. It is not a good sign when I’m fighting the urge to check the clock twenty minutes before the movie wraps up. Vacation clocks in right under two hours, and truth be told, about thirty minutes could have been shaved off.  There came a point where I found myself thinking, “Okay, let’s just get to whatever the next bad thing is that’s going to happen and get it over with.” The plot pretty runs as follows: family gets in tricky situation, end scene with gross-out gag, repeat ad nauseam, etc.  

I know I’ve had little positive to say about this picture, but it really isn’t all bad. There are more than a few laugh-out-loud moments, but a shorter run time, and leaving one character on the side of the road, would have benefited this film a great deal. Overall, Vacation is a decent film but a missed opportunity. 

Final verdict: 2.5 out of 5.

Forgotten Gem: Backlash

One of my favorite directors…in fact maybe my absolute favorite director…is John Sturges. I will not take the time to list all of the Sturges movies I like, but I am particularly fond of his westerns. Recently, I had the chance to catch one of his oaters that I haven’t seen before. Backlash, from 1956, is excellent! I had not heard of the film until I came across it on Encore Westerns, but I am glad I found it!

The movie stars (the underrated, in my opinion) Richard Widmark, joined by Donna Reed. I will not give too much away regarding the plot (no spoilers here), and will only say that the story revolves around Widmark searching for the man who left a group of men stranded. This man ran off with quite a sum of gold, leaving others behind to be slaughtered by Apaches. The search for this man, and the quest to learn his identity, is well handled and very suspenseful. In fact, the premise, and suspense that stems from it, has caused some reviewers to classify this film as a “psychological western.” This subgenre is known for building slow burning suspense, relying more on tension rather than scenes of action (the original 3:10 to Yuma is a good example). Backlash certainly has elements of this, but make no mistake, there is a ton of action in this picture! In fact, I was amazed at just how many gunfights there were. The film practically opens up with one, and never slows down. Widmark battles a band of gunfighting brothers, Apaches, hired gunhands, and a ruthless cattle rancher.

The film is only 90 minutes, and the story moves along at a brisk pace with little to no filler. It’s a lean, action-packed gem of a western with excellent pacing, an exciting story, and great acting. I am not sure why this movie is not more well-known, or why it has not received a wide DVD release. It is a forgotten treasure that every western fan should see. It’s just the type of movie I love, and while not a masterpiece of epic filmmaking or groundbreaking, I give it a perfect 5 stars out of five.

Film Review: Night of the Creeps

Save for the Universal and Hammer classics, I’m not a huge fan of the horror genre. But, for whatever reason, several weeks ago I found myself watching Night of the Creeps from 1986. And, while I almost always avoid modern horror like the plague, sometimes a good cheesy scary flick from the ‘80s can be fun, and Creeps did not disappoint.

First of all, there seemed to be a trend in the ‘80s to mix horror with comedy, and Night of the Creeps does this effectively. In fact, this may be more of a comedy than an outright horror film, with some elements of sci-fi thrown in for good measure. Without giving too much away, the opening scene, taking place on an alien spacecraft, is very funny! This scene is short, and is about as “sci-fi” as the film gets. The movie then shifts to 1959 (presented effectively in black and white), before moving to the main story set in the mid-1980s (returning to color). The plot involves “creeps” (little slug like space creatures) that attach themselves to a host body and turn their victims into zombie like creatures who then try to kill other people. Yes, you read that plot description right. Oh, there’s also an escaped asylum patient with an ax, who makes an appearance during the 50s sequence, as well as in zombie form in the 80s portion.

Basically, this is just your standard horror comedy with elements of science fiction featuring aliens, mutant slugs, zombies and college students fare.

And because this is a ‘80s movie featuring college kids, there is a fair share of partying and a bit of nudity (I think it was a requirement for most “teen” films in the ‘80s…I envision some studio executive reading the scripts and then exclaiming, “I know what this picture needs: more boobs!”). The nudity is pointless and brief, and very typical of the era. In addition to this, there’s some random cursing, so better not watch this one with the kids around. There is also some over-the-top gore, but it’s so cheesy and all done in good fun, which made it hard to get offended. Let’s just say special effects have come a long way since 1986, but that adds to the charm and fun of the movie.

There are clichéd characters in this one; the college kids featuring nerds and mindless jocks, the washed up cop with a lot of emotional baggage (played very well by Tom Atkins), and of course, the pretty girl all the boys like. It’s hokey in parts, but to be fair, it was the point. And, unlike many modern horror movies, this film is not mean spirited and is certainly not taking itself too seriously. The bottom line is, I like this film probably more than I should, and give it a rating of 3.5 out 5. If you’re in the mood to revisit the ‘80s, then give Night of the Creeps a try.

Two side notes: There’s a reference to Christian glam rock band Stryper that I thought was very funny and really dated this picture! Also, the music during the 50s portion of the movie was great!

Film Review: Riders of the Purple Sage

In the 1990s (and a couple of years beyond), TNT was the “best little movie studio on television.” In other words, they produced some darn good original pictures, and in particular, some darn good Westerns. As a teenager in the ‘90s, I tried to catch as many of them as I could (this was in the days before the blessed invention known as the DVR, and my VCR recording skills weren’t particularly great). Somehow I missed Riders of the Purple Sage from 1996, and have been waiting to see it ever since. It has been on VHS for a number of years, but until recently was not on DVD. I would check for the DVD release several times a year (along with one of my favorites, The Avenging Angel) but was always disappointed to discover it was still not available…until now! Thanks to the Warner Brothers Archives, most of the TNT Originals are now on DVD, and I for one could not be happier. As a devoted and loyal Western fan, I recognized that TNT has given us some of the best modern films in the genre. Thankfully, they do not seem as much like a made-for-television movie as does, say, Hallmark Originals (this is not to say Hallmark doesn’t have some good Westerns, but even the best ones feel like long episodes of a television series, not necessarily a movie). TNT offered great casts, great stories, and some good action.

I say all of this to get around to my review of Riders. Based upon the Zane Grey novel from 1912, this version stars Ed Harris as Lassiter and Amy Madigan as Jane Withersteen. I will admit, I have never read the entire book, but only pieces here and there for a Western literature class I took in college. But, I did notice this filmed version has several differences from the novel. First of all, Zane Grey specifically identified the villains of his story as being Mormons. The 1996 movie does not actually mention Mormonism by name, and I am alright with this. I believe Grey unfairly characterized Latter-day Saints in his book, so I’m fine with that aspect being omitted. In the movie, it is simply a sect of some religious order that is not overtly identified.

Secondly, the movie completely omits a side plot regarding the adoption by Jane Withersteen of a young girl. But, the book may be overly plot heavy, so some trimming was certainly needed in adapting the work for screen.

The movie moves along a bit slowly at times, but I actually never lost interest. In fact, the cinematography is great, and I almost got the feeling that I was actually in Southern Utah watching the storms roll in over the mesas. The beauty of the landscapes alone was enough to hold my interest. But the plot moves along at a fairly good pace, and there are some gunfights sprinkled throughout to keep things interesting. And speaking of gunfights…minor spoiler alert…the final gunfight taking place at the church is one of the best Western gunfights filmed in the last few decades. It had this fan of cowboy action shooting very happy!

Overall, I give TNT’s Riders of the Purple Sage a rating of 4 out of 5. It is a beautifully filmed Western, with a strong story and great acting. The plot drags just a bit in the middle, keeping the film from scoring a perfect five. But, the action packed final twenty minutes makes for some great viewing.

If you are interested in purchasing Riders of the Purple Sage, it can be bought directly from Warner Brothers or from Amazon. Happy watching.

Film Review: Souls For Sale

Earlier this year, the modern-made silent comedy The Artist swept the Academy Awards, and rightfully garnered wide critical acclaim. As an amateur film buff, I loved the movie, but that’s for another review. The Artist, in part, deals with a young woman who makes her way to Hollywood and gradually makes it big. It’s a film for classic film lovers, and Hollywood historians will find much to love. However, The Artist was not the first silent film to address such themes.

Souls for Sale, from 1923, explores (to a limited extent) similar territory. Of course, there is a lot more at play in The Artist, but both films show a girl with a dream to make it big in Hollywood in the 1920s. In Souls for Sale, silent film star Eleanor Boardman plays that girl. I won’t go too much into the plot, but I will say that this film is a real treasure. It not only tells an entertaining story, but also serves as a valuable time capsule. The film shows the early studio system, and contains several great shots of 1920s Hollywood and Los Angeles. We also get the privilege of seeing several famous faces appear in cameo roles, including behind-the-scenes footage of Charlie Chaplin filming A Woman of Paris (a rare drama film from the famed comedian).

And while the film is just shy of ninety years old (!), the humor has held up remarkably well. Many silent comedies relied on slapstick, because audiences obviously couldn’t hear dialogue. However, Souls for Sale foregoes this and contains some very funny lines presented through the intertitles. An example of the film’s humor is a scene in which Boardman is upset because she realizes she has failed a comedic screen test miserably, and most likely will not see her dreams fulfilled. The director, not wanting her to be sad, realizes she might have a chance with dramas and exclaims, “I will make you a star if I have to break your heart and every bone in your body to do it!” At this, Boardman becomes joyful, hugging the director and thanking him profusely. Classic movie lovers will also catch a few digs at the then immensely popular Rudolph Valentino. The film possesses a sarcastic wit, and has no problem poking fun at Hollywood.

For decades Souls for Sale was thought to be among the many lost films of Hollywood’s early days, until prints resurfaced in several private collections. Thanks to Turner Classic Movies and the Warner Brother Archives, this rare film is now restored and available on DVD. Souls for Sale is one of the most obscure films I have in my collection, and I realize that an eighty-nine year old silent film won’t appeal to everyone. But, if you’re a history lover, or a film lover, there is a lot to appreciate in this forgotten tale.