Electric Boogaloo: The Wild, Untold Story of Cannon Films (2014)

This is one that I had been meaning to do on here for a while, and when I mentioned on the podcast that it was available, Sean Malloy from I Must Break This Podcast asked if he could guest on the pod to discuss it, which I thought was a great idea. It was a great conversation, and you can catch that in our archives, episode 166. In addition to us, our friend Mitch at the Video Vacuum has covered this as well.

Electric Boogaloo: The Wild, Untold Story of Cannon Films is a documentary by Mark Hartley, he of the great Not Quite Hollywood: The Wild, Untold Story of Ozploitation! and Machete Maidens Unleashed! He attacks this topic with the same love and attention, giving us the origins of Cannon through their famed production duo Golan and Globus, their rise in the market with actioners led by Charles Bronson and Chuck Norris, and then their downfall. We also get great interviews from names involved, like Albert Pyun, Dolph, Dudikoff, and Sam Firstenberg, who give us interesting insight into how these rebel producers flew too close to the sun, and ultimately fell into the sea.

This is fantastic, Sean and I were in agreement on that. The only complaint we had was we could've used more--like maybe three parts that are each the length this one was. It's one of those rare films where I don't check the slider bar to see how much is left, and when we get to the end, I'm disappointed and want more. It's great seeing and hearing from the big names, like the ones I mentioned above, but then you have people who worked for Cannon at the time, like David Del Valle--who has a great Instagram account, delvallearchives, with a lot of old Hollywood genre content and things from his collection--who gives us insight into things like how Cannon chose films when he was a script reader for them--"I had one pile for Bronson films, and one Norris films." We also get these great stories, like when Golan and Globus worked with Jean-Luc Godard for his King Lear, which is a movie I enjoyed, but hearing the issues behind it made it even better. If you love the movies we love here on the site, this documentary is for you.

This is now the 73rd tag for Dolph, his 72nd film, and his second appearance in a documentary, the other being Power of Grayskull: The Definitive History of He-Man and the Masters of the Universe, which we reviewed a few years back. It would've been nice to have more of him here, but it kind of makes sense that we don't, because he only did one film for Cannon--which was a big one for sure, but still only one. There was a sense in hearing him discuss it, that he was disappointed with how it turned out, and wasn't comfortable with the production as it was happening. He was riding high from Rocky IV, this was as big as he was going to get, and this felt like the next role to take; but it came out after the toys had fallen out of favor, and while it looked nice for a Cannon film, it was still a Cannon film made on the cheap, and ultimately it was a bust that didn't make its budget back. It starts Dolph down a path that leads to DTV-dom, which was our gain, but unfortunate for him--though he's bounced back somewhat now, getting his redemption while riding a seahorse in Aquaman.

We last saw Michael Dudikoff in 2022 with Fury of the Fist and the Golden Fleece, so it's been a bit, and probably will be a bit before we see him again. At one time he actually had more tags than Dolph, and he was one of the first that we had the complete DTV filmography of on the site, but he hasn't done much since 2002 so we don't see him as often anymore. Unlike Dolph, who only did the one Cannon film, Dudikoff has a bunch, including the American Ninja series, one of the greatest DTV action franchises ever, and that means he's in this much more. Also unlike Dolph, whose career started downward after his stint with Cannon, for Dudikoff it opened up the world of DTV action that we know him from now. And what a career it was, especially between the first American Ninja and 2002's Stranded, for me it's a top ten DTV action career, and I don't know with the state of DTV action today if anyone will bump him out of the top ten, even if he doesn't do more films. What we get here is the down-to-earth guy we thought he was, which was fun to see, and fun to hear him give us his experience. Truly one of the greats to ever do it.

Albert Pyun was great as well, talking about Cannon and Golan-Globus in general, but also some specific films he worked on with them like Cyborg and Journey to the Center of the Earth--neither great experiences for him. It was a bit melancholy knowing he's no longer with us, but also a reminder that his insights on film were fantastic and always worth hearing--and he was so generous with them in giving us backstory on some of the films we reviewed. This brings us back to the possibility of getting him into the 50 Club, as this is one more in that direction so he's now at 46 films--47 tags because he asked us to review Mean Guns a second time. There are two more films available that he's directed, Cool Air, which I can rent, and The Interrogation of Cheryl Cooper, which I've had trouble finding. Those two would get us to 48, and then he was credited as a producer on Final Examination, making 49. So close. There's also Interstellar Civil War: Shadows of the Empire, which doesn't seem to be available. If it ever were, that would do it.

Finally, with a film like this, there's a question of who to tag and who not to tag. After reviewing Randall Scandal, I made the decision that file footage of an actor in a documentary isn't enough, but if they give an interview filmed specially for the documentary, that counts. The other thing is, are they the subject of the documentary? That's why Golan-Globus are tagged, despite not being interviewed. But that's also why Chuck Norris and Charles Bronson aren't tagged. Had one of the clips of the films had a McDonald's in it, would I have tagged "McDonald's?" I don't know, but I doubt it. For genres like "Ninjas," even though this had clips from ninja films, it wasn't a ninja film per se, so it didn't get that tag. Had someone done an interview in full ninja gear, would I have tagged this "ninjas," or had someone interviewed a shark would I have tagged this "sharks?" Maybe, but I'd have to see it happen first before I could say either way.

And with that, let's wrap this up. Currently you can get this on Tubi here in the States. YouTube also has a great version if you don't get Tubi in your area. This does a great job handling a subject that's near and dear to our hearts, and worth checking out. Also worth checking out is the podcast episode we did with Sean from I Must Break This Podcast, number 166 in the archives.

For more info: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt2125501

Looking for more action? Check out my short action novel, Bainbridge, and all my other novels, over at my author's page! Click on the image below, go to https://www.matthewpoirierauthor.com/

Terminal Force (1989)

I was looking for something new to me to review on the site, after a spate of reviews on films that were either on our pod, or pods I'd guested on, and I saw this bad boy on Tubi. A non-ninja Richard Harrison sounded like a lot of fun, plus it was directed by Fred Olen Ray. Let's see how it did.

Terminal Force has Harrison as a disgraced cop on suspension after he killed a kid who pulled a toy gun on him. At the same time, mafia boss Johnny Ventura (John Henry Richardson) kidnaps the daughter of a guy who's going to testify against him, so Harrison's boss gets the crazy-Grinchey idea of having Harrison do it. Harrison needs to rehab his image, because he's on suspension he can work outside the rules of the force, and also because he's on suspension, he's expendable! It sounds like a win-win! He hooks up with a dancer that used to work for Ventura (Dawn Wildsmith) to try and track the girl down, but can he trust her? What about his friends on the force? Who can he trust? Beyond a bottle of Stoli, no one.

This is fantastic. It's not going to make any top ten lists or blow anyone away, but it's a solid 84 minutes of late 80s low-budget action, complete with shootings, explosions, and boobs. The opening two scenes involve a car going over a cliff, and our hero in that shot above shooting a would-be liquor store robber in front of a backdrop of 80s-era bags of chips and cans of soda. If Harrison's not going to wear a ninja costume, that's what I need. From there, it might be pretty paint-by-numbers, but it's a good paint-by-numbers, like a McDonald's cheeseburger that you put down after a long week at work, or on your way home from vacation when you're looking for something familiar. Sure, I know too well here in Philly that that cheeseburger can have a stale bun, or way too much ketchup, or get screwed up any number of other ways, which if we're extending this metaphor we can say the same about this kind of movie, it can also get screwed up any number of ways, but Ray, Harrison, and company pull it off, and we're left with the comforting cinematic equivalent of junk food, which is always fun.

This is now 17 films for Fred Olen Ray on the site, so he's close to joining Albert Pyun as the only two people with 20 or more director credits. He has a ton of stuff on places like Tubi, but I think it's his work in this late 80s/early 90s period that's my favorite. I read that the movie was shot in five days, and it's in and out in 84 minutes, but delivers everything you want in that window. Even with the padding and the plot exposition dialog, it comes off in a way that's a lot of fun that it works in spite of the fact that it goes against the rules of filmmaking. For example, in that opening scene where the car goes flying off a cliff, before that we have an old mafia boss and his lawyer talking, and while their conversation is all plot exposition, they sound hilarious--plus the boat of a Caddy they're sitting in with the covered headlights doesn't hurt--and then we get the fantastic payoff of the car going over the cliff. After that, it's an extended scene of Harrison going into a liquor store and the clerk giving him a hard time about limes. It's all padding, but it's also fun to watch Richard Harrison disheveled and arguing about limes. And then we get the payoff of the robbery. The money now is in Christmas movies and Lifetime thrillers, so that's what he makes, but when the money was in stuff like this, Ray was great at it, and this film is another example of that.

This is our third Richard Harrison film on the site, but his first non-ninja movie. He's really funny here, which works in Ray's offbeat style in a way I wasn't expecting--I mean I guess I shouldn't have based my opinion on him off of two Godfrey Ho ninja movies where he's not only been dubbed, but dubbed with new lines. It would've been nice if Harrison got to speak to someone on a Garfield phone, but the film could be forgiven for not giving us that gem. While this is only his third film, as we near October and our Hall of Fame inductions, he has to be a consideration. Sure, over a dozen of his films are ninja movies Godfrey Ho made without his permission, but he also made a ton of stuff like this that had nothing to do with ninjas, and he's a low-budget star who started before the video store and cable age, and bridged us into that from the grindhouse low-budget theater age. Truly one of the greats, and we see that more here than in his Godfrey Ho ninja movies.

We've gone over all the ways that these late 80s/early 90s DTV actioners are superior to their modern counterparts. Some things the modern movie can't help, like the nostalgia for the 80s soda cans and bags of chips, or the Cadillac boat with covers on the headlights. Often too, when movies try to go back in time they screw it up, so I'd rather they don't try to recreate the aesthetic. Some though they do have control over, like making sure the two actors having a plot exposition conversation are fun to listen to--though again, there was something of an "of the period" quality they had that gave them a nostalgia edge in this that a Texas Battle and a son of Wayne Gretzky couldn't pull off. But the biggest one might be John Henry Richardson. He was fantastic chewing the scenery as baddie Johnny Ventura. How hard is it to get him to be your mob boss baddie? I get that there are certain realities that make creating modern DTV flicks tougher than it was 35 years ago, but casting John Henry Richardson isn't one of them.

Finally, I'd like to use this penultimate paragraph to spotlight the late 80s doughy mullet guy. You see him there above, squinting through full cheeks, the kind of cheeks aging women today pay a lot of money for, but at that time, especially for a guy, they were seen as a negative. You also have the light amount of mulletude in the back, not a lot of party, maybe enough for a few people over on a Sunday to watch the Rams game with some cheese and crackers and light beers. Now you're probably asking, "Matt, what's the difference between this kind of guy, and the Pork Roast?" The Pork Roast is meatier, you buy him at the store by the pound and roast him in the oven over low heat with some root vegetables. The late 80s doughy mullet guy is softer, a bread loaf that doesn't have a firm crust. Millennials made sourdough bread out of him during the pandemic and posted the results on social media. Guys like Fred Olen Ray and Jim Wynorski were great at using these guys, they found them all over LA, on their way back from In-N-Out Burger with their dinner in a bag. "Hey, you wanna be in a movie?" "What do I have to do?" "Nothing, just stand there with a gun, we'll take care of the rest." "Sure, I got nothing else going on today!" Here's to you late 80s doughy mullet guy, you were one of the great ones.

And with that, let's wrap this up. As of this writing you can find this on Tubi and a bunch of other free streamers here in the States. If you've got 90s minutes burning a hole in your pocket, you could do a lot worse than this one. Maybe they don't make 'em like this anymore, but we can still stream them.

For more info: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0100764

Looking for more action? Check out my short action novel, Bainbridge, and all my other novels, over at my author's page! Click on the image below, go to https://www.matthewpoirierauthor.com/

Chuck Steel: Night of the Trampires (2018)

Recently I was a guest on the Exploding Helicopter podcast, and this was the film Will and I talked about. Not only does it have an exploding helicopter, but it's a send up of 80s cop-on-the-edge action films. Of course I was all in and ready to get after it.

Chuck Steel: Night of the Trampires is a stop-motion animation film created by Mike Mort about the eponymous hero, a cop on the edge in the mid-80s, looking for revenge for the death of his lady at the hands of ninjas. When people in the city start turning up dead, they think they have a grizzly serial killer on the loose, but when an old man named Abraham Van Rental shows up with a stake and tries to kill one of the victims who escaped her killers, Steel learns that these killings are the work of "trampires," the dreaded hybrid of tramps and vampires. At the same time, the precinct psychiatrist's attempts to help the force get in touch with their feelings is rendering them ineffective at fighting crime. That means it's now it's up to Steel and Van Rental to find the source of the trampires and take them all down.

Overall this is a fun time. For the most part the jokes about 80s action land, and land in a particularly smart and endearing way that I think all action fans will appreciate. On the other hand, the jokes about Steel and other guys dressing like women are dated and hacky, especially for 2018, and some of the sexual jokes were a little too "that friend you know who doesn't know how to dial it down," which in a movie like this you usually want, but, again, seeing Van Rental getting screwed by a pig/vampire is a bit much--another analogy is the comedian who's dying and hopes excessive profanity and jokes about sex will save them. As bad as that could be, this movie is full of jokes, and the fact that more land than don't means this works for me, and I think for action fans it's worth checking out.

We've all seen a lot of 80s action send-ups, and some are just so over-the-top--Stallone-style--that I would get it if you were skeptical of another one, but what I really loved about this film was how well they nailed them, even when they were over-the-top. I think the animation aspect of it helped too, you can do that over-the-top thing with stop-motion characters, and the animation lends an element of unreality that allows it to get away with the unreality of the action world in a way that a live-action unreality action world spoof would look gratuitously over-the-top, which would cause us to roll our eyes at those, when those same moments in this film feel more endearing.

One of the questions Will asked me on the pod was who my favorite cops on the edge are. The two I pulled off the top of my head were John McClane from the Die Hard films, and C. Thomas Howell's Mark Goddard in The Sweeper. Some other great ones in my mind are John Matuszak in One Man Force, Fred Williamson in any number of films where he played a Chicago cop in the 80s and 90s, and Dolph Lundgren's Chris Kenner in Showndown in Little Tokyo. Outside of the hacky sexual jokes or jokes about Steel dressing like a woman, this movie creates a caricature of our favorite cops on the edge that does the concept justice--but at the same time, it exists solely for this animated world created Mike Mort--there's no actor who could play a live-action Steel and make it work the way he works here. It's a testament to how well-conceived and executed Mort's vision is that it works so well.

The "trampire" aspect of this shouldn't be lost in all the great 80s action send-up talk, because it was a fun take on vampires that I thought really worked. It also allowed the film to be classified as a horror film, which meant horror films sites picked it up--and much more than the action sites according to the IMDb critic reviews section. I think the reason for that is horror sites review anything horror-related, whereas I think many action sites--myself included, though I'm more action by default because I do like to cover other genres--would look at the idea of an 80s action animated spoof and think it can't be good. Either that, or it just hasn't crossed enough of our radars. I hadn't heard of it at all until Will asked if I wanted to discuss on his pod, and then when I watched it, I couldn't believe I hadn't heard of it before. The problem is, there's just too much Dolph, Van Damme, Rothrock, etc. out there that needs reviewing, plus tons of actual 80s action movies we haven't done yet that's now becoming more available. Maybe if Dolph had voiced one of the characters we'd have known about it sooner--actually I know we would've.

 
Finally, no 80s action spoof/send-up would be complete without a fantastic soundtrack, and this film definitely delivered on that. My personal favorite was a Vixen track, who I loved during the Hair Band era, as ten-year-old Matt had crushes on all of them. It was a reminder of another element we’re missing in the current DTV age, whether it’s the New Metal/“Wildfire in the Streets” 2010s period, to the modern remixed/drum machine age, beautiful Hair Metal and 80s/90s-era rock added a layer that enhanced otherwise unremarkable actioners, and without it the movies are, well, just unremarkable. Take Wilding. Sure, Wings Hauser is fantastic, and the plot idea is ridiculous, but the great soundtrack with a Pat Benetar-esque singer giving us “Don’t Try to Stop Tomorrow” just makes it that much better. The problem is, with modern DTV budgets being slashed, getting a band to record in a studio is often out, which is a loss for all of us. My advice to modern DTV studios: cut one star from the tin, and find a group of aging rockers to give you two hard-driving tracks and one ballad.

And with that, let’s wrap this up. This is currently available to rent on Amazon for a good price. I think it’s worth it as an action movie fan, this is a lot of fun, and it gets a lot of action movie elements right. And thanks again to Will for having me on the Exploding Helicopter podcast. If you’re not subscribed to it you should be!

For more info: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt4278346

Looking for more action? Check out my short action novel, Bainbridge, and all my other novels, over at my author's page! Click on the image below, go to https://www.matthewpoirierauthor.com/

Ruthless (2023)

Back in June Ty from Comeuppance and I looked at this on the pod as part of our Dermot Mulroney double feature. We were excited about the prospect of a film called "Ruthless" that stars him and is directed by Art Camacho. When we got stuck in on it though, we discovered it had more "ruth" than we expected.

Ruthless stars Mulroney as a high school wrestling coach whose daughter was killed by a guy she was on a date with. Trying to pick up the pieces, he discovers one of the kids trying out for his team, Catia (Melissa Diaz), might be getting abused at home. So he pays her a visit and breaks her stepfather's (Mauricio Mendoza) arms and hands, thinking that'll solve the problem. Normally it would, but in the world of 2020s DTV, everything leads to a sex trafficking ring, and this is no different, as Catia's stepfather sells her to some group led by Jeff Fahey that operates this overly elaborate thing out of Vegas. Mulroney knows he's the only thing that stands between Catia being sold to some buyer overseas, so he gets in his SUV and breaks as many arms and legs as he can to get her back.

As Ty and I saw it, this suffered in three ways. First, Mulroney's character wasn't that likeable. I think they were going for the tough-love coach kind of thing, but he just seemed like a jerk to Catia. Second, the whole trafficking thing was too convoluted. When he gets to Vegas and infiltrates the baddies, he has to create an account and sign in? Is he making a purchase from a sex trafficking ring, or signing up for a loyalty account for his local cafe? And finally, the breaking bones thing was kind of not "ruthless." When you call a movie "ruthless," for us as the audience, we're looking for a killing spree. We come from the world of PM and Cannon, where guys get set on fire and kicked out of windows. Mick Fleetwood taking one between the eyes from Robert Patrick in a Vegas casino. C. Thomas Howell tossing Ed Lauter out of a biplane. Chuck Norris blowing up Richard Lynch with a rocket launcher. That shit's "ruthless." None of that works the same if the hero just breaks their arms. There were some positives though. Camacho's direction was solid, Mulroney's lead was enough to let us know that he could do this in more DTV actioners, and I also liked Melissa Diaz as Catia. I think as a Hulu time-waster you could do a lot worse, it just needed to be more to live up to its name.

This is now 53 tags for Art Camacho on the site, which is third all-time behind Dolph and Daniels; plus this is his 12th director tag, which puts him in a six-way tie for fourth all-time in that category, and four back of Fred Olen Ray for second-most. As his directed films goes, this is well behind Recoil, which for me is his best, but I think from there it's better than most. What hurts this film isn't his ability as a director, in fact I think that's what gives this a level of quality that keeps it from being a full-on miss. Maybe if this is called "The Wrestling Coach" it's not saddled with the expectations of what "Ruthless" should be, but even then the plot has holes in it that hurt it, and I don't know that as a director he was going to overcome that. As a fan of his work for a long time, we came into this with high expectations, but I also think it shouldn't be overlooked that he's directed a film that doesn't look out of place with the other DTV actioners on Hulu, like Wanted Man or Section 8, which is fantastic to see, especially knowing how much work he's put into getting to this point. Here's to you Mr. Camacho, 90s action wouldn't be what it is without you, and congratulations on the success you're seeing with this one, it's well-deserved.

Mitch at The Video Vacuum in his review of one of Cinema Epoch's Emmanuel-titled flicks complained that you can't name a movie "Emmanuel" and not have nudity--there's an expectation there that that name carries with it. I think the same is true of the title "Ruthless." I mean, look at that cover, a grimacing Mulroney putting a gun into the jacket of a well-tailored suit, with the tagline "One by one. He'll X them out." It's like it's setting up for a remake of Zero Tolerance--and how amazing would that be? Fahey as one of the baddies, along with a group of other character actors, like maybe Eric Roberts and Michael Pare, and Mulroney being like "you killed my daughter, now I'm coming for all of you." Instead, this movie had too much ruth. No one was "X'd" out, there was no tailored suit and gun, no Fahey in a casino taking one between the eyes, or the guy from Bosch getting tossed out of a window. If anything though Mulroney's performance here told us he could do that, we just need to see it. Maybe he and Camacho can get a do-over and make a "Ruthless" that's sufficiently lacking in ruth.

The human trafficking thing is an en vogue topic, especially since it's achieved this Satanic Panic-level among many Conservative types. Middle class women all over America are posting warnings on their Facebook about suspicious people putting empty water bottles and pieces of cheese on their cars parked at the local Hobby Lobby or Michael's, looking to ensnare them in convoluted trafficking rings that don't actually exist. That doesn't mean human trafficking isn't a serious concern that needs to be addressed though, it just isn't this thing like we see in this movie where Mulroney goes into a fancy hotel room and makes an online account and bids on the girl he wants. That's where I think this could've worked better, is if it was closer to what human trafficking actually is. Like let's say Catia's stepfather still sells her to some shady type, and he tells her mother that she ran away. Fahey isn't some rich business guy, he's just some lowlife who moves her around and connects with people online who pay to sleep with her. And Mulroney's character knows the stepfather's lying about Catia running away, and he investigates--then goes on a killing spree to find her--I'm not saying it all needs to be realistic, but had they played it closer to reality, it wouldn't have been so convoluted. Also the way they felt they had to tie in the daughter's killing to the trafficking ring, why not just have her be killed by a creep she went on a date with? It diminishes the real and more common issue of women actually experiencing violence in situations like that that have nothing to do with fictitious trafficking rings--and it still would've been enough of a motivation for Mulroney to want to save Catia.

Finally, in the podcast episode I mentioned my friend in college who talked about the fact that you can be "ruthless," but you can't "have ruth." I've played with the word a bit as I've been talking about this movie, but it is an interesting quirk in the English language. "-less" suggests "without," but how can you be without something that can't exist on its own? I did some digging (looked it up on Quora), and it turns out "ruth," comes from the verb "rue," which makes more sense. There was a noun form of "rue" that looked like "rueth," then "ruth," and it was from that that "ruthless" was born. At some point I guess we dumped that noun form of "rue," because spellcheck doesn't like "ruth," just the name "Ruth," but "ruthless" survived. The thing is, to describe a movie called Ruthless that isn't "ruthless," we have to have the noun "ruth" to show the thing it's not lacking by not being "ruthless." Like if the film was called "Penniless" but Mulroney's character had money, we'd say "he wasn't lacking in pennies" to critique the movie. The other thing is, if "ruthless" comes from the noun "rue," could we use the homophone "roux" and have a movie where Mulroney is a chef out for revenge called "Rouxthless"?

And with that, let's wrap this up. You can currently get this on Hulu. It's not horrible, and you may find it to be a fun time killer, it just doesn't live up to that title, tagline, and cover image. As far as the podcast episode, it's number 162 in the archives, "Dermot Double Feature," where we look at this and Lights Out, another film starring Mulroney.

For more info: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt14670094

And my newest novel, Don's House in the Mountains, is available now on Amazon! Click the image to buy.

Road House (2024)

I wasn't sure if I was going to cover this one, especially considering when I started the site how I was ardently opposed to reviewing the Road House sequel, but when I saw some of the other sites and pods covering it, I figured we should do it as well, so I had Will from Exploding Helicopter on the pod to talk both this and the original. In addition to us, Chris the Brain at Bulletproof Action has covered this, both on the site and podcast; and the DTV Digest covered this on their pod.

Road House has Jake Gyllenhaal as Dalton, a disgraced MMA fighter living out of his car and engaging in cage fights. After one fight that ends up not happening against Post Malone, Jessica Williams, owner of a bar down in the Florida Keys, asks if Gyllenhaal can come down there to run security for her bar. When he arrives, he discovers all isn't what it seems, as a crime boss who could pass as a Crypto Bro (Billy Mangussen) seems to be causing all the issues, and when Gyllenhaal thwarts his plans, the Crypto Bro's dad calls in an aggressively nude Conor McGregor. Will our hero stick it out and save the day?

As we discussed on the podcast episode, there are elements that made the first one work that this one lacks. Like a supporting cast we care about who develop as the film goes on. Chemistry between the hero and the leading lady. A plot that, as silly as it might be, is consistent for the most part and works in the world it exists in. This doesn't have any of that. None of the supporting characters develop in any kind of way. One of the best scenes in the original was when Kathleen Wilhoite performs "Knock On Wood" with Jeff Healey and his band, showing how she was growing as the bar grew. We have nothing like that here, as instead of one house band throughout, we're treated to a series of Hipster jam bands, each as unmemorable as the one before it. I also didn't think Gyllenhaal had great chemistry with Daniela Melchior, which might have happened in the original if they'd gone with Annette Benning, but they didn't, and Kelly Lynch was great with Patrick Swayze. So with no chemistry, why do I care that they're hooking up. Then there was the uneven plot. Early on they make a big deal about the crocodile in the water, and he eats one baddie, and then that's it. Don't the filmmakers know the rule on Chekhov's Crocodile? Finally, we had a lot of CGI, which I could forgive, but it looked off, which made the scenes hard to watch in spots. The thing is, at 90 minutes this would've overcome all of those shortcomings and could've been a fun Saturday night pizza and beer film; but at that two-hour runtime, I'd rather just watch the original.

All that said, I thought Jake Gyllenhaal was great. If any performance made the film it as his. When I first started the site, I never would've expected I'd be doing a Gyllenhaal film, but such is the world we live in now where even the biggest names go straight to streaming. The thing is, beyond Gyllenhaal, this felt like a straight-to-streamer, so we had this big movie star and top-tier actor with no one else at that level starring with him. I think if you have someone at a Gyllenhaal level, you need at least one other star in the cast that, when you click on their IMDb bio, there's an "All About" or "Career Retrospective" video; and then maybe someone who's a notch below that, and then you can get into the other names we recognize here. Like Guy Ritchie's the Covenant, which is the film Gyllenhaal did before this, you have Emily Beecham and Jonny Lee Miller. I think Daniela Melchior and Jessica Williams, as good as they are, don't quite cut it, so I was left with a feeling of everyone just being excited to work with Gyllenhaal seeping into every scene. I thought we may never see him again, as he's now the star of the current number one prestige TV show, Presumed Innocent, but it looks like he has another Amazon project in development, possibly a sequel to this.

One of my complaints was the lack of chemistry between Gyllenhaal and Melchior. Where there was some chemistry was between Gyllenhaal and BK Cannon, who plays the Kathleen Wilhoite role. Again, that character wasn't developed like she was in the original, which was too bad, because Cannon turned in one of the better performances. That's the thing though, this movie wasn't going to make any unsafe choices--hell, they were afraid to make Dalton a famous bouncer, they had to go with the safer choice of making him an MMA fighter. And maybe that's indicative of how I felt about the movie overall, it was too safe. For all the danger in the plot, the cliched nature of everything meant that I knew where everything was going before it went there--no chances being taken. Had they started with BK Cannon as the love interest, I imagine the whole thing would've been a series of zags from there.

I refused to believe that people are dumber nowadays, but maybe the people making movies think they are? The original Road House was a modern take on the Western, and we had characters with names from famous Westerns, but the movie didn't overtly tell us over and over "this is supposed to be like a Western!" We got it, right? And if we didn't, that was our problem. In this new one, there's a father and daughter who own a bookstore, and the daughter constantly tells Gyllenhaal he's like the hero in a Western. It defeats the purpose of making your film a modern version of the Western if you tell us every ten minutes! I'm sorry I'm yelling, I was just frustrated. 

Finally, I saved my number one complaint for this seventh paragraph. The whole point of the original Road House is that it's about a famous bouncer! And that the world the film takes place in has other famous bouncers! Anything else, you just have an action movie. What makes Road House Road House isn't a bar called "Road House" or a hero named "Dalton" who takes a job as a bouncer, he needs to already be a bouncer, and a famous one at that. Why would you change the most important part of the movie? It's like remaking The Maltese Falcon and making Sam Spade a boxer instead of a detective. Why would you do that? Because you don't respect the source material, you think you're better than it, and it turns out you're not, you're worse.

And with that, I'll wrap this up. This is included with Prime, so if you're already paying for two-day shipping, you can watch this too. If it was shorter it could've overcome its shortcomings, but this isn't the classic the original is, and it wasn't going to be based on the concept they went with--I guess it's the old adage, if you're going to fail, fail fast, and 90 minutes would've meant they were failing faster. Still, it's Jake Gyllenhaal straight-to-streaming, so we get to review it, which is a silver lining. And for the podcast episode Will and I did, it's number 160 in the archives.

For more info: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt3359350

And my newest novel, Don's House in the Mountains, is available now on Amazon! Click the image to buy.