Meet Joe Black (1998) – Review

Doomed love affairs are a staple of the romance genre and in 1998 director Martin Brest and Universal Pictures brought us a romantic fantasy mystery film that did its best to provide an interesting take on the subject matter, sadly, it didn’t completely work.

Loosely based on the 1934 film Death Takes a Holiday, which itself was an adaptation of the 1924 Italian play La Morte in Vacanza by Alberto Casella, Meet Joe Black revolves around William Parrish (Anthony Hopkins), a wealthy media mogul who is celebrating his 65th birthday with a lavish party at his extravagant mansion. Despite his success in business, William is grappling with his mortality and the realization that his life may soon come to an end. Meanwhile, his youngest daughter Susan (Claire Forlani) has had a “meet cute” with a handsome young man (Brad Pitt) at a coffee shop – unbeknownst to her, directly after their cute back and forth he is struck fatally by multiple cars – later that night William gets an unexpected visitor, Death personified, who has taken on the human form of that newly killed young man so as to experience what it means to be alive. He offers William a proposition: he will postpone William’s death if William agrees to be his guide and show him the wonders of human life.

 

“I am Death, destroyer of dinner parties.”

William reluctantly agrees to this proposal, and now going by the name Joe Black, he begins to immerse himself in the world of the living. As Joe explores life as a human, he becomes enamoured with Susan but things are a little complicated as he’s wearing the Meat Suit of the guy she had kind of fallen for at the coffee shop. Unaware of Joe’s true identity, she is drawn to his enigmatic charm and profound insights into life. As Joe spends more time with Susan, their bond deepens, and he begins to question his role as Death. He starts to experience human emotions and desires, particularly his growing love for Susan. However, Joe’s newfound humanity complicates his mission, and he must ultimately confront the consequences of his actions.

 

Can true love survive Death?

Stray Observations:

• Death taking on a young and handsome personage is nothing new, a young Robert Redford played Death in the 1962 Twilight Zone episode “Nothing in the Dark.”
• Death’s knowledge is rather inconsistent, in one moment he is caught off guard by the saying “In this world, nothing can be said to be certain, except death and taxes” but in the next, he knows the idiom “Money can’t buy happiness.”
• When Susan asks Joe if he’s gay he responds “No” but can Death even have a sexual orientation? Or is his heterosexuality a leftover remnant from the body he’s using?
• La petite mort or “little death” refers to the sensation of post-orgasm as likened to death, but when Susan and Joe have sex is that even more literal?

 

Could this tryst result in a baby with the powers of Death?

Martin Brest’s Meet Joe Black explores profound themes about life, death, and the significance of human connections. It delves into the choices we make and the impact they have on ourselves and those around us. The emotional dynamics between Joe Black and Susan, as well as the relationship between Joe and William Parrish, form the core of the narrative. Unfortunately, the screenplay fails those core relationships. The love story between Joe and Susan isn’t so much tragically doomed as it is forced and non-existent. In 1934’s Death Takes a Holiday, he sacrifices his own happiness so that the woman he loves can stay and live with her friends and family, and when he reveals his true appearance to her as Death and tells her, “Now you see me as I am” her response shocks them all. “But I’ve always seen you like that. You haven’t changed.” And when he asks her “You have seen me like this?” she responds “Yes, always.” Death then declares “Then there is a love which casts out fear, and I have found it! And love is greater than illusion and as strong as death.” And the two of them then go off to the great beyond together.

 

That doesn’t quite happen in this film.

Instead of a powerful love story that transcends life in death, we have Susan refusing to recognize Joe as Death. He says “You know who I am” and she sputters, “You’re… you’re Joe.” So rather than two lovers truly recognizing each other and the depth of their love, we get a girl in denial and Death giving her the Brad Pitt meat suit he’d been wearing as some sort of consolation prize. This doesn’t even qualify as a bitter-sweet happy ending, it’s just lazy. And sure, she did have a connection with the guy at the coffee shop but she fell in love with Joe Black, who knows where this relationship is going to go after the credits roll. Worst is the fact that there is almost no screen chemistry between Brad Pitt and Claire Forlani, which I don’t fault the actors for as Pitt playing this supernatural being awkwardly operating his meat suit was a hard element to overcome.

 

Hopkins and Pitt had better screen chemistry.

Plot problems aside one cannot deny the cast all bring their best with the material provided. Anthony Hopkins shines as William Parrish, portraying the wisdom and vulnerability of a man confronting his mortality with remarkable depth. Claire Forlani’s portrayal of Parrish’s daughter, Susan, adds a poignant layer to the narrative, as her character becomes entangled in a rather complicated romance with Joe. I particularly love the character of William’s older daughter Allison (Marcia Gay Harden) who deeply loves her father even though she knows that she’s not the favourite. But it is Brad Pitt who really delivers the goods here, giving a hauntingly enigmatic performance as Joe Black, capturing the character’s otherworldly essence with subtle grace. His portrayal of a supernatural being dances between comic moments to those of pure malevolence – he is not one to be trifled with – and this performance also has that “Fish out of Water” element and reminded me of Jeff Bridges in Starman, with him moving around as if being in a human body is a new thing and experiences many things for the first time.

 

The joy of discovering peanut butter.

However, despite its strong performances and visual appeal, Meet Joe Black suffers from significant pacing issues and a lack of focus in its narrative. Clocking in at over three hours, the film struggles to maintain momentum, with numerous scenes feeling unnecessarily prolonged or repetitive. While the leisurely pace may be intentional to evoke a sense of contemplation and introspection, it often detracts from the overall impact of the story, leading to moments of tedium and disengagement. There is a subplot of Susan’s boyfriend Drew (Jake Weber) scheming behind her father’s back in some kind of corporate raiding plot, that should have been entirely jettisoned as the movie certainly didn’t need it as it added nothing to either the primary conflict between Joe and William or the love story between Susan and Joe.

Note: There is a two-hour version made to show on television and airline flights, which cuts out most of the plotline involving William Parrish’s business dealings. I’d like to see that cut.

In conclusion, Meet Joe Black is a visually stunning and emotionally resonant film but one that falls short of its lofty ambitions. While it boasts strong performances and moments of poignancy, its pacing issues and romantic failings cripple it. And while this film pales in comparison to Death Takes a Holiday it does have some great performances that elevate the material and remains a compelling exploration of life’s mysteries, albeit one that ultimately leaves viewers wanting more.

The Most Dangerous Game (2022) – Review

Let me start by saying I love a good action thriller, and there have been many great adaptations of Richard Connell’s short story “The Most Dangerous Game” over the years, but this one misses the mark entirely. While this entry tries so hard to be intense and suspenseful it still somehow ends up feeling like a cheap knockoff of better movies in the genre.

The film follows the formulaic plot of its predecessors, offering little in terms of originality and even less in the area of talent in front and behind the camera. In this adaptation of the classic story, we have WWII veteran Sanger Rainsford (Chris “CT” Tamburello) travelling with his father Marcus Rainsford (Judd Nelson), who is a world-renowned big game hunter, aboard a large tramp steamer destined for some unknown local, to which it must pass by an island notorious for its dangers. But before we can commence with the action and the inevitable sinking of the ship – as they were all dumb enough to take this stupid trip – we get a scene where old man Whitney Tyler (Bruce Dern) sparks a debate with Marcus and fellow traveller Rex Allan (Randy Charach) on the fairness of hunting bears, pointing out “Do they have guns? How’s it a fair fight if he’s not armed?” Now, this debate did occur in the original short story but here it comes across more like the ramblings of a man suffering from dementia rather than anything cohesive or intelligent.

 

“Let’s have bears with frickin’ laser beams attached to their heads!”

And why is this group on this particular hunting trip? Well, it seems that Sanger has been suffering from nightmares about his time fighting the Germans during the war and good ole pops thinks the best cure for post-traumatic stress is to hand a person a gun and send him into the jungle to hunt big game. Now, I know PTSD wasn’t recognized as a mental disorder until the 1980s but I don’t think even Sigmund Freud or Carl Jung would have suggested arming a patient and then having them go off into the woods to work it out for themselves. Needless to say, things don’t go well and that dangerous route the captain (David Nett) was worried about proved to be just that, dangerous, and before you can say “Hunting season is open” the ship is sunk and our merry band of idiots have washed ashore. Our three survivors, Sanger, Marcus and Rex, hear a rifle shot in the distance and quickly decide that it is the sound of civilization.

 

Call me crazy, but that doesn’t look like civilization to me.

Upon stumbling across this rather rustic chateau, the group is soon introduced to the master of this island, Baron Von Wolf (Casper Van Dien), a German aristocrat who doesn’t waste time lulling his guests into any sort of false sense of security, instead, he states outright that he’s become bored with hunting animals and now only hunts prey with courage and the ability to reason. When Rex points out that “No animal can reason” it’s up to Sanger to point out the obvious, “You hunt men.” This appalls his guests but the Baron laughs at their accusations of him being a murderer, believing these men couldn’t possibly hold “Romantic ideals about the value of human life.” He then reveals that it is well-placed sea mines that provide him with fresh game – such as the mine that took our group’s ship – and so our movie finally kicks off with the villain revealing his plans with the subtlety of a rotting fish.

 

“Did I mention I thought the Nazis were too soft on the Jews?”

The film then follows the standard formula of adaptions of Richard Connell’s short story, our “heroes” will be given the rules of the hunt and sent off with a three-hour head start. Sanger is introduced to two other captives of the mad Baron, a man named Quinlan (Edward Finlay) and a woman named Mary (Elissa Dowling), who have been waiting around until the Baron could find an interesting enough use for them, but now that can be paired with Sanger it will make the game much more interesting. Sadly, not much interesting happens and we the viewer have become as bored as the Baron claims to be. Not even the forest terrain or watery ravine can provide respite from this film’s tedium, only the brief appearance of Benjamin Colt (Tom Berenger), whose ship was also sunk but has managed to allude the Baron all this time, brings us anything verging on original.

 

“Rambo’s got nothing on me.”

Stray Observations:

• To get to their destination, the boat must pass in between a dangerous reef and the shallows of an island that strikes fear in even their brave captain, to which I must comment “You’re on a boat, if the route is that dangerous either take the three days to go around or forget the whole thing and go to Disneyland.”
• Casper Van Dien had better luck in the jungle when he starred in Tarzan and the Lost City, and this movie could have used some cheap CGI and silly witch doctors, at least then it would be laughably interesting rather than just laughably bad.
• This movie is a collection of actors who have reached new levels of slumming. Judd Nelson had already starred in the hilariously bad Shaquille O’Neal comic book movie Steel yet this movie makes that entry look Oscar-worthy by comparison.
• As is the case with most adaptations of “The Most Dangerous Game” we will get a scene revealing a macabre trophy room, sadly, all Baron Von Wolf was a trophy shelf.
• Chris “CT” Tamburello became “famous” on MTV’s reality show The Challenge, which is its own kind of dangerous game, but his thespian skills are subpar at best nor does he come across as a competent hero.

 

“I’ve been to worse camps. Have you ever heard of Crystal Lake?”

Directed by Justin Lee, this rendition of Richard Connell’s “The Most Dangerous Game” is a pitiful attempt at revitalizing a classic tale. Despite its promising premise, this film falls flat on its face faster than its protagonists can run through the jungle. The acting – or lack thereof is quite remarkable, the cast seems to have been plucked straight from community theatre, or more accurately, they deliver performances so wooden you’d think they were auditioning for a middle school play. While some projects can be described as an “Embarrassment of Riches” this one is simply embarrassing, and even seasoned actors like Tom Berenger couldn’t salvage this train wreck of a script. I also hope you like flashbacks as they are peppered through the film like mouldy bread crumbs.

 

We’re not talking Saving Private Ryan here.

And speaking of the script, it’s riddled with dialogue so cringe-worthy that it veers between the laughable and the downright painful. I rolled my eyes so often I thought they might get stuck in the back of my head. But the real tragedy of this remake of The Most Dangerous Game lies in its direction as Justin Lee seems to have forgotten the basic principles of filmmaking – like how to build tension or create a sense of urgency – and the pacing is so sluggish that I nearly dozed off halfway through, and the action scenes were about as thrilling as watching paint dry. The story is supposed to kick off with a shipwreck but Lee had no budget for such things, so instead of a thrilling sequence of a ship sinking and men struggling for their lives we get Sangar sitting in his cabin and hearing muffled explosions, which triggers a PTSD flashback, and then suddenly he’s washed up on the beach.

 

Is this a metaphor for everyone’s career being washed up?

The cinematography by Eamon Longis while serviceable lacks much in the way of creativity, relying on tired visual tropes without adding anything new to the genre and the action sequences are poorly choreographed and lack impact, failing to generate any levels of real excitement or tension. The film’s editing is also embarrassingly bad as many scenes end by simply fading to black as if the filmmakers simply ran out of money while shooting. Then there is the lack of blood and gore. When remaking a story that has been told dozens of times and you don’t have the talent to bring much originality – not to mention talented actors or crew – the least you can do is give us some good gruesome kills. Alas, this is another area where Justin Lee fails us.

 

Even the villain gets a weak-ass ending.

What is disappointing is that the decision to set the movie sometime after World War Two could have worked, with Sanger a veteran of the conflict could have resulted in him becoming a more interesting threat to our villain, sadly, this was not to be the case, instead of our lead acting like a seasoned soldier he encouraged sleeping instead of pro activity and demonstrated negligible survival skills. And this is the crux of this film’s problems, there isn’t one character who is even remotely believable. The plot hinges on some pretty basic and fundamental ideas, that have been explored time and time again over the years, yet director/scriptwriter Justin Lee – and yes, he not only directed this piece of crap he wrote it as well – completely misunderstood what is required to make this type of story work. The key ingredient being that “If we don’t care about the characters, we won’t care about anything.” I do want to know who Casper Van Dien’s dialect coach was because his German accent was hilarious.

 

“I watched a Hogan’s Heroes marathon as preparation for this role.”

In the end, 2022’s The Most Dangerous Game is a forgettable mess of a movie that fails to live up to its potential and is nothing more than a terrible combination of non-actors paired with bored veteran actors who are simply trying to earn enough money to stave off being sent to the Actors Retirement Home. Save yourself the agony and skip this one – unless, of course, you enjoy 95 minutes of your life on cinematic mediocrity.

Surviving the Game (1994) – Review

A film where a bunch of white rich assholes chase a black man through the woods is an entry that is already on very shaky ground but New Line Cinema was not the kind of studio to shy away from such a controversial subject, nor were they known for thoughtful subtext or even text for that matter. Thus, we get this particular strange outing that pits Ice-T against Rutger Hauer.

The premise? Oh, it’s a gem. In this outing we have Ice-T playing a homeless man who’s down on his luck and gets roped into a twisted game of cat and mouse by a group of wealthy thrill-seekers, led by the diabolically cheesy Rutger Hauer. It’s like Richard Connell’s “The Most Dangerous Game” meets a budget version of Die Hard with a side of campy ’90s flair. The hero of this movie is the aforementioned homeless man Jack Mason (Ice-T) who becomes despondent when he loses his only friends, fellow homeless man Hank (Jeff Corey) and his pet dog, but just as he is about to commit suicide a volunteer soup kitchen worker, Walter Cole (Charles S. Dutton), stops him and suggests that he go and see his partner Thomas Burns (Rutger Hauer) about taking a job as a hunting guide.

 

“I see from your resume that you don’t have a resume.”

Mason takes the job and is flown out to a remote cabin surrounded by hundreds of acres of deep woods, where he meets the men that he will be “guiding” on this hunt. In addition to Burns and Cole, the party includes Doc Hawkins (Gary Busey), the founder of the hunt and a psychiatrist, Texas “oil man” John Griffin (John C. McGinley), and wealthy Wall Street executive Derek Wolfe Sr. (F. Murray Abraham) and his son Derek Wolfe Jr. (William McNamara), the latter of whom is at first unaware of the true purposes of the hunt. As this is an adaptation of Richard Connell’s “The Most Dangerous Game” it is quickly revealed that each of these men has paid $50,000 for the privilege to hunt a man and that man is, of course, the idiot Jack Mason who thought his expertise as a street person would somehow translate to that of a wilderness hunting guide.

 

Law and Order: Special Dumb Unit.

What follows is your standard stuff, with Jack Mason turning out to be more resourceful than expected and the overconfident hunters getting picked off one by one, as if they were sexually charged teenagers in a Friday the 13th movie. Unfortunately for us, his resourcefulness only works because the men chasing him are complete idiots and terrible shots. This leads to some fairly uninteresting clashes in the woods as our hero runs from one set of bushes to the next while the rich asshats bumble around. And we are left with such questions as “Can you really track a man through the woods while driving an ATV at 60 mph?” This movie does sport a talented cast, even including Oscar-winning actors like F. Murray Abraham, but aside from Gary Busey who is a lot of fun here, the rest seem to be in paycheck-cashing mode.

 

The Mortgage Payment Theatre Troupe.

Stray Observations:

• The idea of rich assholes hunting homeless people had already been a year earlier in the John Woo film Hard Target with Jean-Claude Van Damme.
• While dumpster diving, Mason finds a handgun and pockets it, hoping to get at least $20 bucks for it, not once thinking he could be carrying around a weapon used in a crime.
• Charles S. Dutton plays the most aggressive soup kitchen worker I’ve ever seen. Mason simply walks by his 7th Street Mission yet the man stalks him down the street practically demanding he take a job from his partner, one that he isn’t remotely qualified for. Not a big red flag at all.
• Actor John C. McGinley is no stranger to playing assholes who hunt men through the wilderness. The very same year that this film came out he was in Steven Seagal’s “classic” On Deadly Ground.
• F. Murray Abraham’s character brings his son on this hunt without telling him that the prey will be a human, with some such bullshit reasoning about making him a man, but all this does is endanger the entire criminal enterprise if the son doesn’t go along with this madness and then informs the authorities.
• This movie may be a cheap imitation of “The Most Dangerous Game” but it does include a nice trophy room scene.

 

Not since Futurama, have I seen a better collection of heads in jars.

As a connoisseur of adaptations of “The Most Dangerous Game” this entry left me sorely disappointed and questioning why I even bothered to invest my time in it. Directed by Ernest R. Dickerson, Surviving the Game attempts to blend action, suspense and survival elements into a cohesive narrative but it ultimately falls flat on its face. The script simply fails to deliver characters that are beyond one dimension, as if giving “tragic backstories” is enough to keep us invested. And let’s not forget the dialogue these actors were forced to spew out, which ranges from cringe-worthy to downright laughable. Even with their sinister monologues and menacing stares, this group is about as threatening as a Boy Scout troop. The great Rutger Hauer comes across like a discount Bond villain who is auditioning for a community theatre production. You almost expect him to twirl his moustache and cackle maniacally at any moment.

 

“All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain”

This a far cry from Rutger Hauer’s villainous turns as android Roy Batty in Blade Runner or the psychopath John Ryder from The Hitcher, two films where he gave us truly memorable antagonists, opposed to here where he’s just playing a rich schmuck who gets his kicks chasing men through the woods.  Much of the film’s problems are due to Eric Bernt screenplay, which to begin with isn’t that interesting of take on such a well-worn premise and worse is that it wastes a great cast as it gives them very little to do. In fact, the only real interesting moment in the film is when Gary Busey gives this bizarre dinner monologue about the origin of his character’s scar, which Busey wrote and not Bernt. It’s a right bonkers speech and Busey completely commits to it, sadly, he’s the first hunter to lose to Mason and thus the chances of further moments of lunatic genius are gone.

 

“I knew I shouldn’t have overshadowed the screenwriter.”

To make matters worse, the film’s attempts at social commentary feel forced and heavy-handed. The portrayal of the wealthy elites as heartless hunters preying on the less fortunate is ham-fisted and lacks nuance, coming across as little more than a cheap attempt to add depth to an otherwise shallow storyline. The action sequences, which should have been the film’s saving grace are poorly executed and lack any sense of tension or excitement. The choreography is clumsy and the special effects are downright amateurish. It’s clear that the filmmakers were trying to emulate the success of other action-packed survival movies, but they missed the mark by a wide margin. On the plus side, the movie is shot on location at Lake Wenatchee and Wenatchee National Forest so if nothing else, we get some nice scenery to look at.  At least when someone’s not chewing it.

 

“I forget, which one of us is the crazier one?”

In conclusion, Surviving the Game is a forgettable mess of a movie that fails to deliver on its promising premise – any fans of Richard Connell’s short story or its many adaptations will find nothing here of worth.  So save yourself the time and frustration and skip this wilderness fiasco altogether. There are far better survival thrillers out there deserving of your attention.

Hard Target (1993) – Review

If you like mullets and gratuitous slow-motion explosions have I got a film for you. In an entry that takes the premise of Richard Connell’s story “The Most Dangerous Game” to ridiculous heights and then tosses in Jean-Claude Van Damme in for good measure, we have an absolutely glorious action flick on our hand. So, grab your denim jacket, comb your mullet, crank up the volume, and enjoy the ride!

This particular take on Richard Connell’s 1924 short story “The Most Dangerous Game” deals with hunt organizers Emil Fouchon (Lance Henriksen) and Pik van Cleef (Arnold Vosloo), one a ruthless businessman and the other his right-hand man/mercenary. These two arrange the hunting of homeless men as a form of recreational sport for bored rich men who are willing to pay top dollar for the privilege of killing the “most dangerous game” but the wrinkle in their enterprise comes when their current prey, a former Marine and now a homeless man (Chuck Pfarrer), turns out to have family and his disappearance brings his daughter Natasha Binder (Yancy Butler) to New Orleans to look for him. Things quickly go from bad to worse. Of course, the real complication comes in the form of Chance Boudreaux (Jean-Claude Van Damme), an out-of-work homeless Cajun merchant seaman and former United States Force Recon Marine, whom Natasha enlists in her search for her missing father. Needless to say, Fouchon does not take such interference all that well.

Note: In the history of over-the-top villainous performances, Lance Henricksen as Emil Fouchon is easily in the top five. He gleefully chews the scenery as it explodes around him.

There is not much of a plot to this entry, other than giving us enough plot points to fill in the “Most Dangerous Game” framework, as we get Van Damme and Butler finding themselves in the cross-hairs of Fouchon and his minions due to their insistent meddling, with Arnold Vosloo proving he’s the go-to villain when it comes to this type of things as he chews up almost as much scenery as Lance Henriksen.  So our heroes will be chased from one location to the next and after an impromptu trip into the swamp they take a detour to pick up Chance’s Uncle Clarence Douvee (Wilfred Brimley), who is here to add a bit of “Cajun” colour to the proceedings. He not only provides our hero with a shotgun he also gives us the most hilariously bad French accent you’ve ever heard.

 

“Eat your damn Quaker Oats, boy!”

In the field of 90s action films Hard Target delivers more kicks than a Rockette on steroids. Van Damme is like a ballet dancer, except instead of pirouettes, he’s spinning roundhouse kicks into bad guys’ faces. It’s a thing of beauty, really. If that doesn’t make you want to watch this movie immediately, I don’t know what will. But what truly sets John Woo’s take on “The Most Dangerous Game” apart is its commitment to excess. Need a motorcycle chase through the streets of New Orleans? Check. How about a man running in slow motion from an explosion? Double check. What I’m saying is that this movie is a checklist of clichés and tropes of the genre, and is better for it as it brings everything to the table that fans could want.

 

“Have you ever fired two guns whilst jumping through the air?”

But perhaps the most impressive feat of Hard Target is its ability to make you forget about things like physics and logic while all this is going on. Cars explode for no reason, people survive falls that would make Evel Knievel wince, and somehow Van Damme’s muscles manage to look even bigger when he’s covered in dirt and sweat. I was kind of surprised that John Woo didn’t include a scene where Van Damme’s mullet would disengage from his head and take out one of the hunters all on its own. Who says John Woo can’t show restraint? And just when you think they’ve reached peak insanity, they throw in a scene where Van Damme punches a snake. Yes, you read that correctly, he punches a snake. But will our two heroes survive when they are so grossly outnumbered – Wilfred Brimley can only do so much – and with both Arnold Voslo and Lance Henriksen after them, how could they possibly win?

 

Easily, these guys are as dumb as they are evil.

The type of bad guys this film has on hand are of the overconfident variety – Fouchon uses a gun that only fires one bullet before needing a reload and he refuses to let Van Cleef simply kill Chance when he has the opportunity – and all of these “hunters” can’t even shoot a guy coming towards them in slow motion. These are caricatures of villainy, complete with evil smirks and over-the-top monologues. You’ll find yourself simultaneously rooting for Van Damme to kick their butts while applauding their commitment to being deliciously evil. With their over-the-top accents and evil goatee twirling, you’ll wonder if they stumbled out of a Saturday morning cartoon. But hey, we’re not here for subtlety, right? We’re here for the sheer joy of watching Van Damme do splits while kicking butt. Of course, the real villain of this piece is the City of New Orleans which is populated by citizens who seem rather blasé about people being hunted through their streets.

 

“Nothing to see here folks, move along.”

Stray Observations:

• The rules of this particular “Most Dangerous Game” are simple, if the prey make it ten miles through the city and reach the river, they get to keep a money belt with $10,000 inside it, but Douglas Binder is killed while running out on a dock that sticks out over the river. I’m starting to think this game is rigged.
• Fouchon stops a client from shooting the “prey” while the man is running through an abandoned train yard, stating “This isn’t Beirut,” yet he lets him noisily open fire while in a cemetery within the French Quarter. I’m starting to think New Orleans is a terrible tourist destination.
• How do you know you’re watching a John Woo film? If you see a group of pigeons or white doves flying up in slow motion it’s a good chance you’re watching a John Woo movie.
• While this movie does avoid the cliché of a movie set in New Orleans taking place during Mardis Gras, it does have its final act in a warehouse storing old Mardis Gras parade floats. And who knew paper mache could be so explosive?
• Chance empties an entire magazine of bullets into a man’s chest but then he delivers a roundhouse kick to the poor schmuck’s head. Now, I’m not one to knock a person’s style but that did seem rather unnecessary.
• The military term “hard target” refers to something heavily defended or not accessible to the general public, which doesn’t quite apply to Jean-Claude Van Damme.

 

Can his awesome mullet be considered a defensive measure?

With a film being directed by the legendary action maestro John Woo you know you are in good hands, and Hard Target wastes no time in immersing us in a whirlwind of adrenaline-fueled action sequences.  John Woo’s signature style shines through in every frame. With meticulously choreographed gunfights, explosive stunts, and breathtakingly choreographed fight scenes we get everything one could want out of an action flick and Van Damme is the quintessential 90s action hero who fills the “You fucked with the wrong guy” trope perfectly. And while it may not be a masterpiece of storytelling, the film’s relentless pace and unabashed embrace of these action cinema tropes make it a thoroughly entertaining experience. It’s clear that filmmakers weren’t trying to reinvent the wheel but rather to deliver heart-pounding thrills and larger-than-life spectacle, a goal it achieves with aplomb.

 

I’d have loved it if The Predator had shown up.

In conclusion, Hard Target is a prototypical action movie that delivers exactly what it promises: adrenaline-pumping action, memorable set pieces, and a charismatic lead performance from Jean-Claude Van Damme. For fans of action cinema and lovers of adaptations of “The Most Dangerous Game,” this is a must-watch example and one that stands the test of time, showcasing the talents of its cast and crew in a spectacle of pure adrenaline-fueled escapism. Strap in, hold on tight and prepare for a wild ride through the heart of the bayou.

Slave Girls from Beyond Infinity (1987) – Review

Director Ken Dixon not only brings us a film with one of the greatest titles ever written, because what could be better than Slave Girls from Beyond Infinity, but he also gives us another fine entry in “Films based on Richard Connell’s “The Most Dangerous Game” with this particular offering taking that well-worn premise into the sexploitation arena.

The plot of this film follows the misadventures of Daria (Elizabeth Kaitan) and Tisa (Cindy Beal), two attractive prisoners who escape from space-slavers only to soon find themselves stranded on a desolate planet, where they end up in an even more precarious situation. This particular planet is home to Zed (Don Scribner), a man with a scarred face who lives in a large fortress and is also the planet’s sole sentient inhabitant and is guarded by two robots who also act as the fortress’ keepers. The girls are invited to join Zed for an evening meal at his table, where they are introduced to two other survivors from another crash-landing and who are also Zed’s guests, Rik (Carl Horner) and his sister Shala (Brinke Stevens), but it becomes quickly apparent that when it comes to being a good host, Zed is more Norman Bates than he is Fantasy Island’s Mister Roarke.

 

“Have I mentioned my love of taxidermy?”

As this is an adaptation of “The Most Dangerous Game” Rik and Shala’s fears are quite justified – neither one of them will be making it to the end credits – and it is soon revealed that Zed has a secret trophy room where he showcases a collection of mounted heads, and that each night he will choose someone to be the prey in his personal hunt. What sets this film apart from other adaptations is its sci-fi setting, not only does it take place on a distant planet in the far-off future but we also get a nice assortment of sci-fi elements to spice things up, such as robot man-servants, ghoulish alien zombies and a particularly decent Predator rip-off. The alien zombies are simply these random creatures for our heroine to confront – no explanation is given as to what or why they exist – but while the mutant hunter creature is another unexplained addition it does provide a nice deus ex machina during the final act so our leads can survive.

 

“If it bleeds, we can laugh at it.”

What follows is your standard B-Movie sexploitation flick, with our cast of female characters running around half-clad as the film’s snarling villain performs clichéd monologues in between attempting sexual assaults on the aforementioned half-clad women. That said, one of the film’s standout elements is its strong female leads, portrayed with both sass and resilience by Elizabeth Kaitan as Daria and Cindy Beal as Tisa. Despite the exploitative nature of their roles, both actresses infuse their characters with a sense of agency and determination, elevating them beyond mere eye candy. Can we consider Laitan or Beal to be considered good actors, not really, but I will give them credit for doing their best in a genre that doesn’t expect much to begin with.

 

“Let’s go and kick some chauvinistic ass!”

Stray Observations:

• The movie opens with music that is nearly identical to the Klingon theme from the beginning of Star Trek: The Motion Picture by composer Jerry Goldsmith.
• This movie may take place in the far-off future in a distant galaxy but the “slave girls” are dressed in bikinis more in keeping with what Raquel Welch was wearing in One Million Years B.C.
• The opening escape from the “Space Gulag” includes such science fiction jargon as “I’ve got an idea, that if we can reverse the polarity on these cuffs, the only thing standing between us and freedom is stealing a starship.” You can’t argue with that kind of logic, that’s just science.
• Well-known pornographic film star Ginger Lynn was originally cast as Daria but was fired after three days of shooting when the director realized she couldn’t act. Seriously, he was surprised a porn star couldn’t act?
• In a post-coitus moment, Daria tells Rik “I never knew how much I missed making love, you made me feel alive again. I know what I want. I know what it is I’m fighting for.” I’m not exactly sure what she means. Is fighting for the right to an orgasm?
• Three beautiful women being hunted through the jungle had already been done in an episode of Charlie’s Angels called “Angel Hunt.”
• In 1992 this film was condemned as “indecent” on the floor of the U.S. Senate by North Carolina Republican Senator Jesse Helms, which I find to be a bit of a stretch. Cheesy, goofy and completely exploitative for sure, but I wouldn’t say it quite reaches the level of “indecent” or even salacious.
• While this film is an adaptation of “The Most Dangerous Game” it also owes a lot to the “Women in Chains” genre, with scenes of prerequisite scantily clad prisoners in peril. This film knows its target audience

 

For all your hormone-addled teenage boy needs.

While many movies and television shows have utilized the premise of Richard Connell’s short story “The Most Dangerous Game” most of them simply borrow the “hunting humans for sport” element, but with Ken Dixon’s Slave Girls from Beyond Infinity, we actually get a fairly faithful remake of the original classic tale, only within a sci-fi setting. This adaptation includes all the key elements of the original story, a villain who creates shipwrecks to acquire his prey, a launch that is supposedly “under repair” but is revealed to be perfectly fine, and when our protagonists arrive they discover that there are already two guests, a sister and a brother. The brother feigns drunkenness because he is suspicious of their host’s motives as their party once consisted of four but two have already entered the jungle with Zed and never returned. This may be a cheesy sexploitation film but it gets points for its faithfulness to the source material.

 

We also get a very “interesting” take on the villain’s trophy room.

The biggest departure from the original story is there is no male hero to rescue the fair damsel, instead of having Joel McCrea rescuing Fay Wray, as was in the 1932 adaption, or John Loder saving Audrey Long in the 1945 version, in this outing we have Elizabeth Kaitan as a fiery prison escapee to fill the role of the heroic lead, and she certainly doesn’t need a man to help her get out of trouble. Who said 80s low-budget exploitation films couldn’t be progressive? Of course, one can find fault in the level of acting on display – which makes you wonder just how bad was Ginger Lynn if what we get here was an improvement – but these kinds of films have rarely offered much in the way of great thespian displays of acting, in fact, the kind of displays presented in these 80s B-Movies are more along the lines of “Is the heroine a “B” Cup or a “D” Cup” and little concern is put on whether or not the actress was a graduate from Julliard.

 

This kind of movie doesn’t require much in the way of method acting.

Needless to say, the special effects in this low-budget offering do not hold up when compared to what was coming out of the big studios at the time – no one is going to mistake this film for The Empire Strikes Back or Blade Runner – but for what money they had it all made it to the screen. The robot manservants were not only well designed they were sort of fun, in an old married couple kind of way, and if the script had leaned more into that comedic sensibility this could have been a gem, alas, that was not to be. It should be noted that the aforementioned Predator knock-off looked surprisingly good and both the model work and matte paintings that were utilized to create this futuristic world were more than adequate to the task of taking us to a world of adventure and danger.

 

How they ended up on Skull Island I’ll never understand.

In conclusion, Slave Girls from Beyond Infinity is a campy, cheesy, and somewhat hilarious adaptation of “The Most Dangerous Game” with a goofy sci-fi spin to make things interesting. It’s the kind of movie you watch with friends, a bucket of popcorn, and a healthy dose of skepticism and perhaps alcohol. So grab your laser gun, put on your best space bikini, and prepare for a cinematic journey that’s truly out of this world – in more ways than one!