aforandromeda Reviews

Mercy (IV) (2016)

Implausible stop-start chiller.

[4/10 · 19 January 2017]

Two sets of bitterly divided half brothers convene upon their dying mother's house to discuss their potential inheritance. When the house is unexpectedly laid siege to by masked raiders, a spiral of violence leads to a shocking turn of events.

Mercy, put forward as a Netflix Original, is unfortunately a very dissatisfying film. The initial scenes, although sombre, are well set up with a moody resonance. However, that all falls apart when after the initial assault by the raiders, everything stops, rewinds and what's just happened has to be explained all the way through the middle third. All this ensures is that all tension is lost and the viewer is just simply watching the same scenes all over again, albeit at different angles. When the last third approached, I really lost interest in what was happening.

Things aren't rescued by the utterly implausible plot and the fact that when your central characters are so po-faced, miserable and sketchily drawn, how is the viewer meant to care about whether they escape their predicaments or not? The actors really don't have much to work with when their characters are so two dimensional.

It's a shame really, as there is some good work on show. The cinematography is decent (although literally too dark sometimes), the raiders' look is suitably threatening and the movie is compact and unpretentious. However, just when you're getting suitably tense, events halt and proceedings sag very heavily. The aforementioned plot is chiefly to blame, as the stop-start proceedings are mostly as a result of the film trying to explain the vague and frankly unbelievable events that unfold.

I'm not going to say that Mercy should or could have been so much better, as there is so much intrinsically wrong with it. Simply, Mercy is an attempt at a shocking chiller that will in the end just leave you cold.

Percentage (2014)

Lazy, turgid crime drama

[2/10 · 17 January 2017]

Two Bronx hustlers, Ant (Cam'ron) and Carter (Omar Gooding) are in the middle of a major deal, when suddenly the authorities raid the club. Both make their escape and are advised to lie low, so it's off to Miami to stay with Carter's cousin. However, lying low is not a possibility when the temptation to make fast money takes hold again.

That's about as exciting as it gets, folks. Percentage is a truly dire experience. The laziness that runs throughout this shoddy caper is inexcusable, covering everything from it's terrible camera work, dull locations (how can you make Miami look dull?), poor direction and woeful acting.

The cast list reads well, but everyone looks like they'd rather be somewhere else. Cam'ron leads with a fantastically uncharismatic display (the white b*tches scene is toe curlingly cretinous), Macy Gray gives a rambling, shaky version of her usual shtick and Ving Rhames delivers the most absurd turn you'll ever (not) want to see him in.

As for the plot, it's both nonsensical and boring, I mean really boring. Even the action sequences, what little there are of them, are totally inept. There also seems to be huge chunks missing from key points (and meaningless ones) in the movie. Add in the badly handled editing and you'll neither fully know nor care what's going on by the end.

Unquestionably one to avoid, this is one Percentage that you'll regret taking a cut of.

Paradox (III) (2016)

Undemanding Time Travel Silliness.

[6/10 · 10 May 2016]

Deep in the heart of the city, a group of brilliant young scientists, led by the mysterious Mr. Landau, are on the brink of completing a machine that will let them travel one hour forward in time. When the first to time travel comes back with dire warnings of the rest of the group's impending demise, who can they trust? More to the point, will they survive, or is their fate already sealed?

Paradox has all the usual ingredients of modern, low budget sci-fi thrillers, from the convoluted story packed with twists and turns, to wonky sets, ropey CGI and hammy acting. The thing is, it actually seems to work for the most part.

The movie is pacey, energetic and unpretentious. Despite it's obviously low budget and limited crop of acting talent, the ensuing 90 minutes are rather enjoyable. Naturally, Zoe Bell is the cream of the acting crop here and she's always worth watching. Her physical talent is a touch underused during the film, but when she gets the opportunity, she uses it well. The rest of the largely unknown cast, despite having some truly naff dialogue to work with, are at least appealing despite some, shall we say, enthusiastic performances.

The direction and editing are pretty snappy and the movie motors along at a fair old click. It's silly, perils of time travel sci-fi hokum, so if you're expecting anything more, this movie is not one for you to watch. If however, you fancy some cheesy, undemanding fun with some campy acting thrown in with your thrills and spills, then there will be no contradictions in you giving Paradox a view.

Tracker (2010)

Absorbing, character driven adventure drama.

[8/10 · 30 November 2014]

Boer War veteran Arjan Van Diemen (Ray Winstone), an Afrikaner who has lost everything at the hands of the British, including his family and farm, lands in New Zealand. A superb tracker and thorn in the side of the British during the war, Van Diemen nevertheless is facing an uncertain future. Ironically, he accepts an offer from former foe Major Pritchard Carlysle (Gareth Reeves) to help hunt down and apprehend a fugitive Maori sailor (Temuera Morrison) who has been accused of murder. Venturing deep into the dominion from the coast, Arjan soon finds himself struggling with not only a formidable quarry, but also his own conscience.

Somewhat overlooked upon release and since, Tracker really does deserve a more elevated status. With a well written script and to the point story line, the film quickly demand the viewer's attention. The characters are well fleshed out, with interesting and sympathetic back stories. Veteran director Ian Sharp handles the tale very well indeed, showing strong technical ability and a polished style but without the need for flashy gimmicks or pointless editing. Crucially, he lets the story flow seamlessly and brings out the best in his talented cast.

Performances are truly excellent throughout, with both Winstone and Morrison utilising their considerable screen presences to great effect without ever becoming overbearing. Winstone, a truly underrated actor in my opinion, brings Van Diemen's inner turmoil and sorrow subtly home, as well as providing a convincingly thick Afrikaans accent. Morrison is equally as good as a man beset by his own demons, eliciting sympathy and respect without overacting. The leads are well supported by the rest of the cast, with Reeves as the respectful Major and Andy Anderson as local tracker Bryce being particular highlights.

Of course, the other star of the show is the wonderful New Zealand scenery. The locations are quite simply breathtaking. Harvey Harrison's cinematography is extraordinary well judged, with each scene set against tremendous backdrops that give Tracker a look and feel like few other movies. Mixed with subtle post-production, you quickly find yourself eagerly awaiting the next stunning location.

The only real criticism to make is that the story arc is sometimes predictable, however this is a minor quibble as Tracker is an exceptionally well made and beautifully shot piece of work. Add in it's splendid performances and you have a truly absorbing, well told and refreshingly unpretentious dramatic adventure that deserves to find itself a greater audience.

Runaway (1984)

Dated but highly enjoyable sci-fi thriller.

[7/10 · 27 November 2014]

Set in undetermined future society where robotics are a major part of everyday life, from performing household chores to construction and more, Runaway follows Officer Jack Ramsay (Tom Selleck), head of the so-called 'Runaway Squad'. His hi-tech unit deals with out of control robots, intervening where humans may be endangered by the machines' malfunctions. When Ramsay discovers a plot by criminal genius Luther (Gene Simmons) to sell advanced microchips and cutting edge weaponry to the highest bidder, he finds himself taking on not only Luther, but also the dangerous killer's deadly robotic creations.

Written and directed by the late Michael Crichton, Runaway continues the theme of the dangers of technology affecting the lives of humans that had been previously visited in his previous works Westworld and Looker. Reviewing Runaway now, thirty years after it's original release, is a real eye opener to Crichton's foresight. Although the appearance of the technology in the movie is dated, being all microchips, clunky robots, switches and video tapes, there are things that have equivalents today. These include flying drones ('floaters'), tablet-like devices, the ease of gaining information through computer profiles of individuals, nannying by technology and the rapacious pervasiveness of the media. These features are integrated subtly and skilfully into the fabric of the film, helping Runaway maintain a surprising degree of relevance so far down the line. The movie is also notable for it's 'bullet-eye view' scenes, which were ground breaking in it's day and much imitated thereafter.

There's plenty to enjoy here as proceedings are quick and unfussy, the plot is purposeful and the action comes thick and fast, with Crichton really building up the tension and thrills during several standout scenes. Although some of the effects are a trifle creaky looking nowadays, the robotics are imaginative and well constructed. The performances are as equally enjoyable, with Selleck and Cynthia Rhodes (as Jack's partner) working well together. The underrated G.W. Bailey (of Police Academy infamy) also does a great turn as Jack's Chief and even a sizzling Kirstie Alley makes an appearance. The only letdown is from KISS legend Simmons, as although can he certainly deliver menacing looks and thousand yard stares, his overall acting ability is somewhat lacking. A much better rock star than actor, that's for sure.

While the movie is dated in parts, it's fast pace and inventiveness, along with Crichton's skillful direction helps Runaway stand up very well when viewed in the modern day. Whether revisiting or seeing it for the first time, Runaway is an oft-overlooked pulp thriller that's well worth catching.

Starship Troopers 2: Hero of the Federation (2004 Video)

Daft and predictable sci-fi romp, but fun nonetheless.

[6/10 · 26 November 2014]

The sequel to Paul Verhoeven's gloriously OTT sci-fi satire Starship Troopers begins with a squadron of the Federation's mobile infantry fighting off wave after wave of attacks from the enemy 'bugs'. Under relentless assault, they make a break for an abandoned outpost. When they reach it, they discover the incarcerated Captain V.J. Dax (Richard Burgi). While trying to secure extraction, can the troopers trust Dax, stay alive and even trust each other?

What should be noted immediately about Starship Troopers 2, is that it's budget of $7,000,000 is not even anywhere close to the first instalment's, so anyone expecting the same kind of movie are going to be sorely disappointed. This is a sequel that has to be judged on it's own merits, while making little in the way of comparison to it's mega-budget predecessor.

The movie wastes no time in getting to the action, opening with firefights and wasted bugs. Once inside the outpost and things settle down, things take a different hue. The claustrophobic confines of the outpost gives things more of the feel of a slightly camp horror movie, replete with nervous tension, dimly lit corridors and the psychics' terrifying but confused premonitions.

Things are helped considerably by the engaging performances of the cast, particularly from Burgi, Brenda Strong and the ever dependable Ed Lauter. The script is certainly full of hammy lines and is quite predictable, but as proceedings rumble on, the schlock horror, bonkers story line and enjoyable performances provide quite an irresistible mix. Some of the satire of the first film makes it in there too, as well as a healthy sprinkling of irony.

The main thing to remember with Starship Troopers 2 is that it's not meant to be taken too seriously. Certainly, it's cheesy fare at times, but it's competently made within the confines of it's budget and the enthusiasm of the cast and crew are evident. Although the sets are slightly repetitive and the cinematography is sometimes unimaginative, there's a satisfying blend of CGI effects and old school gore that makes up for that.

A snappy, schlocky and enjoyably daft movie, Starship Troopers 2: Hero of the Federation is well worth a look for B-movie enthusiasts and fans of the first instalment alike.

Crave (I) (2012)

Meandering, aimless experience that lacks substance.

[5/10 · 23 November 2014]

Lonely crime scene photographer Aiden (Josh Lawson), after years of taking pictures of murder victims on the decaying streets of Detroit, is fast losing his grip. Retreating into fantasy as a mechanism to cope with capturing the horrific images that make him a living, he imagines himself as the hero of the hour in various daydreams. Increasingly under pressure from the conflicting voices in his head, his dark, vengeful side grows along with a simmering frustration at his own cowardice and social awkwardness. After meeting attractive neighbour Virginia (Emma Lung) and sparking a curious relationship with her, Aiden becomes ever bolder in attempting to make his daydreams a reality. However, being the hero isn't quite as easy as he has imagined it to be.

Crave initially begins with a stylish appearance and swathes of jet black yet gleefully malevolent humour. However, the character of Aiden is very underwritten, despite a strong performance from Lawson and this seems to be the story of the film as a whole. From it's visually arresting and intriguing opening, the film quickly finds itself going nowhere.

There is little meat to the bones of the script with the storyline just plodding around, seemingly waiting for some time to pass so it can get to the final third. Director Charles de Lauzarika would appear to have thrown everything at the final half hour or so, with things getting increasingly ludicrous as the possibly schizophrenic Aiden blunders from one catastrophe to the next. The problem is, with so little attention being given to the script and direction of the middle third of the movie, you increasingly find yourself becoming rather disinterested as the plot is meandering and lacking in substance for much of the running time.

This is a shame really, as there are flashes throughout of de Lauzarika's flair and inventiveness, helping to sometimes bring the film out of mediocrity. Unfortunately, Ron Perlman is wasted as Aiden's homicide detective friend, as well as the increasingly bizarre Edward Furlong. Lung does well as Aiden's love interest, however all the supporting parts are as woefully underwritten as the lead character's. The soundtrack to the movie is just as skeletal, all synths with plenty of treble and reverb, but with nothing that you would ever recall.

Stylistically, Crave is a nicely filmed piece of work, with strong cinematography and a moody yet macabre feel. However, it's rendered distinctly average fare thanks to such a threadbare script that not even a talented cast like this can get much out of. Ultimately, Crave is as entirely soulless as the crime ridden streets in which it's set.

Svik (2009)

Ponderous wartime thriller that fails to excite.

[5/10 · 11 November 2014]

Betrayal centres around Nazi occupied Norway in 1943, with rampant profiteers making a killing from supplying the Nazis with both raw materials and luxuries. Tor Lindblom (Fridtjov Såheim), is but one of those profiteers, operating out of his popular Oslo nightclub, Club Havana. However, due to his crucial involvement with the construction of an aluminium factory that will greatly boost the Nazis' ailing efforts on the Eastern Front, the British Government has marked Lindblom for death. Double agent Eva (Lene Nystrøm) along with Tor's pilot brother Svein (Kåre Conradi), must take out Tor and get the plans for the factory to British intelligence before their intentions are discovered by the Gestapo.

Based on true events, Betrayal's story does not translate at all well from the pages of history to an exciting 90 odd minutes of cinema. It's very obvious from the beginning as to what everyone's patterns of behaviour will be and what they will all do to achieve their aims. Although there is some scope for creating tension and drama, there needs to be some sort of elevation of the material to make this work effectively. This is where Betrayal really finds it's major fault; the limp and stodgy direction from helmer Hakon Gunderson.

Proceedings take on a very slow pace, with well over two thirds of it's running time going by before attempts at excitement kick in. Even then, the action is very perfunctory with a distinct lack of tension or thrills. Certainly, the movie is well put together, with a satisfying feeling of authenticity to it's overall look, as well as being handsomely filmed. However, there is no real zip to the direction and as the story lumbers on, any feeling of involvement in the drama quickly fades.

The languid nature of the movie also takes it's toll on Gunderson's ability to elicit convincing portrayals from some of the cast it seems, with the two brothers Tor and Svein (although both are hopelessly miscast) being more akin to sacks of spuds than crucial and dynamic drivers of the plot. However, while Nystrøm's turn as the heroine is pretty good, the real star of the show is prolific German actor Götz Otto as Krüger, the greedy and corrupt Gestapo officer and business partner of Lindblom. Otto really has screen presence and portrays his role with great relish.

Regrettably, there is not much else to recommend Betrayal. Filmed, framed and shot very well, with a convincing attention to detail, the skill of the crew does come through to the viewer. However the lack of tension, predictability and ponderous pacing make this wartime thriller a rather drab affair indeed.

Sharknado (2013 TV Movie)

No excuses for this abysmal movie.

[2/10 · 5 October 2014]

From the people that brought you Mega Shark vs. Giant Octopus and Nazis at the Centre of the Earth, comes perhaps their most talked about and ludicrous movie yet. Yes, the Asylum and SyFy serve up more abysmal dross masquerading as a 'cult' movie. Sharknado follows a ragtag group of survivors of the worst hurricane to ever hit California, complete with multitudes of sharks being washed ashore after huge tidal waves. However, the tornadoes follow and guess what? That's right! They're full of hungry sharks!

This is truly bad, even by the execrable standards of SyFy movies. It's not even as if it's awful because of the bonkers high concept, it's simply a badly made movie on so many levels. The acting is, as expected, uniformly atrocious, with the exception of Cassandra Scerbo as Nova. She throws herself gamely into the nonsensical mayhem and may actually have a respectable career ahead of her. As for the rest, including Ian Ziering (a cinematic equivalent of porridge) as Fin and Tara Reid as his ex-wife what's-her-name, they're truly terrible. The lines between the cast are delivered so poorly, you wonder if all the scenes were directed by the second unit while the director was having a nap. Then there's the fact that editing and continuity are dreadful, with scenes making little sense as a result. There's no suspense, things just happen with no regard for timing and as far as the cars exploding and houses imploding for no reason whatsoever go, don't even get me started.

Then there's the sharks. The crappy, unconvincing CGI sharks. They really do look awful and not in the least bit realistic, so any attempts at portraying shark infested terror raining from the skies fall immediately flat. Mind you, surely the sharks would have asphyxiated being out of water for so long? The concept for this movie is unspeakably stupid and just does not work at any stage.

Although Sharknado is of course low budget tosh, there are no excuses for film making of such execrable standards. There are movies out there with even lower budgets that stand head and shoulders above this rubbish in every conceivable department. This is all so ineptly done by the crew involved, that even a budget twenty times higher would result in Sharknado being just as bad. My appeal to potential viewers of this movie is thus; ignore the hype and the fact that The Asylum want Sharknado to be instantly 'cult'. Take a bite out of something else, in fact just about anything else, not many movies out there are as unbearably bad as this one.

SEAL Team VI (2008)

Relentless stock footage ruins the drama.

[4/10 · 28 September 2014]

SEAL Team VI (a.k.a. Navy SEAL Team) follows the titular Special Forces soldiers in the hostile environment of the Persian Gulf in 1991, as Operation Desert Shield gives way to Operation Desert Storm. Their dangerous reconnaissance mission, confirming targets for air strikes against the Iraqi troops and tanks who have overwhelmingly invaded Kuwait, comes hard on the heels of a catastrophe for the SEALS in Serbia. Whilst facing personal demons, the weight of expectation from the coalition forces to successfully begin the liberation of Kuwait bears down heavily on the team.

This is an ambitious story for an independent movie to take on, especially one that has such an insufficient budget to work with. The plot demands copious amounts of footage of bombers, aircraft carriers and jet fighters. However, the minuscule budget does not extend anywhere near to portraying all of that convincingly. Instead, we get frame after frame of stock footage being relentlessly edited into the film. This gives proceedings a jarring feel and it's especially the case when the characters are supposedly viewing scenes of devastation. Ultimately, you end up knowing full well that much of the scene has been culled from a newsreel. In fact, the stock footage appears so frequently throughout, that you sometimes wonder if you're watching a real movie or simply a clever editing job. There are also notable cutbacks in the costume department, as the Iraqi forces portrayed in the film don't appear to be wearing any kind of military uniform. They actually look more like ragtag members of the PLO, rather than Saddam's feared war machine.

This is a shame as the few scenes that don't feature any kind of stock footage are competently handled. The acting is earnest if unspectacular, the camera work is steady, the editing is sharp and the limited locations are used reasonably well. Positively, the battle scenes are decently filmed and are not without some excitement. The budget just simply can't extend to writer and director Mark C. Andrews' colossal ambition.

Some of this could have been tolerated more however, if it wasn't for a monumentally misjudged and frankly nausea inducing last ten minutes. The final act is so full of pomposity and cornball sentimentality, that it would test the patience of even the most forgiving of critics. It really drags the film down further, looking tacked on and out of place when compared with the lean, dark and unforgiving mood of the movie as a whole, stock footage and all.

SEAL Team VI has met with a hugely negative reception since it's release. The movie is actually not without a little merit and isn't nearly as bad as some reviews have made it out to be. On the whole however, it's an overly ambitious project that falls regrettably short in meeting it's objectives.

The Canyons (2013)

Dull, creaky drama that's devoid of relevance.

[4/10 · 21 September 2014]

The Canyons lays it's cards on the table right from the beginning. The opening scene introduces the main protagonists right off the bat, a curious tactic that immediately signposts the motivations of all the characters.

Tara (Lindsay Lohan) and her rich boyfriend Christian (James Deen) are a couple seemingly living the Hollywood dream. Christian is in the process of cobbling together a low budget slasher movie, using his considerable trust fund in order to break into the film industry. However, the movie's lead, the naive and inexperienced Ryan (Nolan Funk), has a secret that threatens to derail the movie and shatter Tara's relationship with Christian. What follows is a story of suspicion, betrayal and secrets, set in the seedy underbelly of a Los Angeles populated by dream chasers and wanton, predatory selfishness.

The first ten minutes tell the audience immediately that we are dealing with shallow and vacuous individuals, grasping at every opportunity in order to satisfy their self serving natures. This presents the main problems that ultimately ruin any chance that The Canyons might have had of being a compelling drama. In order for a drama to succeed where the majority of the characters are simply dreadful, there has to something to engage the viewer. That could be an interesting script, stylish direction or passionate and sincere performances. The Canyons regrettably has none of these to offer the viewer.

Bret Easton Ellis' script is quite amazingly dull. It really does give the actors very little to work with. The story line contains an unbelievable series of coincidences, the dialogue would embarrass an amateur dramatics class and the characters have no depth to them at all. Lohan tries gamely to prove her acting chops in some scenes, but the dialogue gives her nothing but tired, predictable lines to try and give some life to. It doesn't help matters any further for her that she spends most of the movie opposite James Deen, a porn star who has little or no real acting experience. He starts the movie off reasonably enough, but by the end his acting becomes forced and clichéd. Unfortunately, although Deen isn't primarily a dramatic actor, you can't help but feel that a better director could have coached more out of him. However, even he is streets ahead of the ludicrously named Nolan Funk, who gives a vacant, amateurish and dreadfully stilted performance. That leads me to one of the most significant problems that The Canyons suffers from, that being director Paul Schrader.

Despite his impressive list of past credits, including directing edgy and challenging projects such as Blue Collar and American Gigolo, as well as writing screenplays for most notably Taxi Driver and Raging Bull, it's made abundantly clear from The Canyons why he doesn't make many movies these days. His style is quite simply outdated and his efforts here show that he has done little to keep up with the changes in modern film making that audiences do not unreasonably expect.

The camera-work is creaky and linear, the editing is poor and he overwhelmingly fails to get the best out of an admittedly ragbag collection of actors. You always feel like the crew are in the scene, such are the hackneyed nature of the set ups. For example, many scenes feature an entrance from a character walking into a room with the camera at first at a distance, then either panning across or following them in an unimaginative and linear fashion once it leaves it's previously rigidly static position. Many set ups feel disconcertingly framed, yet they feature hardly anything of interest, lending a stagey, unnatural feel to the proceedings. Strangely, the much talked about sex scenes are so tepid and perfunctory you wonder why they were even bothered with, yet it seems Schrader wanted to elicit some kind of outrageous shock value from them. As they stand, even the actors look rather embarrassed to be in them, even though of course one of them is a porn star.

The talky nature of the dialogue also grates even more than it should as the scenes appear disjointed, either being too long or too short, then simply going on to leave the plot devoid of pace and flow. Locations are curiously bland and the cinematography is completely by the numbers. It all feels very much like the work of someone who didn't have any fresh ideas or flair to assist this very oddly assembled cast who were stuck working with such a tepid script. Everything feels very clichéd and predictable, almost to the point of ridicule.

While Lohan's allegedly erratic behaviour on the set of The Canyons has been well documented, she is actually the only member of this motley crew of a cast to show any real acting ability. There are a handful of scenes that serve as reminders that before her life descended into chaos, she was indeed an real talent with great potential. It would therefore be unfair to blame Lohan and point the finger at her, as many have done, for the critical mauling that The Canyons received. The real blame must go to Ellis and Schrader. I find it remarkable that such an empty screenplay would be made into a movie in the first place and Schrader is a director who is squarely stuck in the past, with his best days as an auteur sadly long behind him.

It's hard to fathom out to what kind of audience The Canyons was aimed at, as it has contains so little in the way of redeeming features. It all amounts to what is frankly an irrelevant and entirely unessential piece of film making that's unquestionably one to avoid. Unfortunately for Lindsay Lohan, this project should have been one for her to avoid as well.

Maximum Conviction (2012)

Highly effective and thumpingly brutal action flick.

[8/10 · 1 September 2014]

When Cross (Steven Seagal) and Manning (Steve Austin) are tasked with the routine decommissioning of a top secret C.I.A prison facility, everything initially goes smoothly until the arrival of two mysterious female prisoners who are to be moved on the next day. However, when the prison comes under attack from a group of mercenaries, led by the brutal Blake (Michael Pare), who demand the handover of the new arrivals, only Cross and Manning can stop them.

It's fair to say that the premise of Maximum Conviction is absolutely nothing new. Borrowing heavily from the plots of Die Hard, Assault on Precinct 13 and Seagal's own Half Past Dead, originality is certainly not on the menu. What is on the menu for viewers however, is a fast paced, brutal and highly enjoyable 98 minutes of mayhem.

Seagal's fight sequences are the best he's delivered in a number of years. He's certainly beginning to show his age, but the choreography is spare, violent, simple and snappily edited, giving Seagal a chance to shine. From what I can make out, the use of stunt doubles is minimal. Steve Austin casts his considerable frame over proceedings, with his fight scenes being especially brutal. Whatever opinions people have of Austin's admittedly limited acting range, he is a heavyweight screen presence, a presence utilised to great effect here. A small criticism is that the pair don't nearly share enough screen time together.

Michael Pare, an actor seemingly always more effective as the villain of the piece, is also on top form. Refreshingly, he plays his role not for villainous laughs, as happens so often in these kind of movies, but instead portrays callousness and sheer nastiness.

It's worth noting that Seagal, after working with director Keoni Waxman in this movie and also the preceding The Keeper and A Dangerous Man, has continued to work with him for two more movies. Waxman, while not the greatest director, seems to be helping Seagal achieve some of the best work he has done in a long time, going a long way to exorcising the memory of some of Seagal's truly execrable misfires of the mid 2000's, such as Shadow Man, Attack Force and Flight of Fury. Waxman's style is direct, straightforward, free of flashy gimmicks and all about the action. Scenes featuring simply dialogue are somewhat rushed, but you forget that when the action is as entertaining and exciting as on offer here. The fights are well choreographed, plus the shootouts are tense, imaginative and highly effective. The movie barely pauses for breath thanks to it's simple and straightforward set up.

Admittedly, Maximum Conviction is unlikely to win Steven Seagal (or indeed Steve Austin) many new fans, mostly due to the movie's unimaginative plot and bone crunching brutality. However, the high quality of action on display may go a long way to bringing some of Seagal's lapsed fans back to enjoying his movies again. As for loyal, existing fans of the two big guys, Maximum Conviction is absolutely essential viewing.

Garrison (2008)

Initially intriguing but ultimately disappointing thriller.

[5/10 · 1 September 2014]

Garrison is principally the story of two army officers, Sergeant Daniel McManus (Kerry Valderrama, also the film's writer and director) and Staff Sergeant Nathan Cross (James Barnes), two soldiers facing different but no less difficult issues in readjusting to life back home.

Sgt. McManus has faced trauma whilst stationed in the war zone, but is doing his best to move forward. However, his work in training the garrison's new recruits and existing soldiers is placing strain on his marriage to wife Andrea (Elizabeth Ingalls). Meanwhile, Ssg. Cross is showing erratic behaviour and having disturbing accusations made towards him about his rapidly disintegrating marriage. When Ssg. Cross goes AWOL from the garrison, Sgt. McManus faces a race against time to find the increasingly unstable officer before the Military Police do, as arrest would mean the end of Ssg. Cross' military career.

Garrison sets out with an intriguing premise, but ultimately fails to overcome it's underwritten script and very low budget. The film's presentation will undoubtedly put many viewers off, with it's drab locations, poor lighting and off-kilter camera-work dragging down many of the scenes. Although the script fails to create any real tension or drama, it does at least attempt to portray the damaged psyches of soldiers returning home from war without being too preachy or overbearing. The supporting characters are also fairly engaging, with Ssg. Xavier 'The Machine' Rivera (Jason Cox) being a standout. However, the characters are given very little to do throughout the movie, with only the dramatic final act letting them (and indeed the actors) spring into life.

However, Garrison is by no means a bad film. It has an earnest quality and it is apparent that the filmmakers and cast were trying hard to make a good movie, it's just that not everyone involved had the required skills to overcome it's low budget. In it's favour, Garrison is at least decently acted by a cast of virtual unknowns and the basic story line is a strong one. Unfortunately, although Valderrama is not without some talent, his writing and directing skills in Garrison are not quite strong enough to raise this movie from the annals of mediocrity.

Ring of Steel (1994)

Highly enjoyable low budget caper.

[6/10 · 31 August 2014]

When star fencer Alex Freyer (Robert Chapin) accidentally kills an opponent, he finds himself cast out of his beloved sport. After being assisted in fighting off a mugging by a mysterious stranger (Joe Don Baker), Alex is invited by him to take part in the titular 'Ring of Steel', an underground sword fighting club. With the lure of easy money and chance to prove himself again, Alex quickly finds that the stakes are raised beyond his control and is soon fighting for not only his life, but that of his girlfriend's Elena's (Darlene Vogel) as well.

Despite the somewhat familiar set up, Ring of Steel is actually well worth a look. It has a sense of fun and an undoubted energy missing from many action movies of the era. Certainly, the plot is daft and the dialogue often cheesy, but it has a lot of charm. The always watchable Joe Don Baker is terrific as the villain and along with the sultry Carol Alt, raises the standard of the otherwise slightly corny acting on show elsewhere in the movie. Most importantly, the sword fights are well choreographed and are highly enjoyable.

Although it's undoubtedly silly stuff, Ring of Steel is nevertheless an enthusiastic slice of low budget fun that's a cut above similar '90s DTV fare.

The Fan (1996)

Well acted but deeply flawed pulp thriller.

[5/10 · 31 August 2014]

From the opening scenes of 'The Fan', it's all too obvious that the late Tony Scott was a strange choice of director for a suspense thriller. Scott's trademark flashy visuals, breathless camera work and hyperactive editing are there from the outset as die-hard San Francisco Giants fan Gil (Robert De Niro), speeds across town in his van while engaging in a somewhat bizarre radio phone-in about the Giants' new $40 million star signing Bobby Rayburn (Wesley Snipes).

Once things calm down a little, we learn that Gil is a hunting supplies salesman who's having a tough time meeting his targets and is under threat of losing his job. Gil is also divorced and struggling to manage access to his son.

When opening day arrives, separate incidents mark a serious downturn in fortunes for both Gil and Bobby, with Gil eventually developing a disturbing obsession with the slugger, thus setting off a frightening chain of events.

'The Fan' is remarkable for a suspense thriller in that it lacks any real suspense. Although Tony Scott wasn't helped by a threadbare and illogical script, the clunky camera-work and jumpy editing mar any feeling of involvement or tension for the viewer in many of the scenes, with the excessive use of close ups beginning to grate after a while. Also, the baseball scenes feel very unnatural and stagey. Most regrettable are the attempts to portray the characters' motivations to the audience, which are two dimensional at best, downright lazy at worst. As the movie jumps from one unlikely encounter and set of circumstances to another, all credibility quickly unravels.

What rescues this movie from outright mediocrity are the excellent performances from a terrific cast, with De Niro and Snipes both being engaging despite their rather clichéd and poorly scripted roles. The supporting cast is top drawer, with John Leguizamo as Bobby's unscrupulous agent and Ellen Barkin's languid radio host being highlights, especially in their all too brief scenes together.

Over and above the poor quality of the script, you're left with the impression that this is a movie with plenty of style but little in the way of substance. A different choice of director would have helped this movie be more than the mediocre pulp fare that it is, as although Scott was a fine director, creating tension and projecting believable characters was not his forte.

Although 'The Fan' is fairly watchable in parts, by the time the hammy and frankly ludicrous final act is over, you're left with a feeling that it could all have been so much better.