MOVIE REVIEW: MAXXXINE

 

In 1980s Hollywood, adult film star and aspiring actress Maxine Minx finally gets her big break. However, as a mysterious killer stalks the starlets of Los Angeles, a trail of blood threatens to reveal her sinister past.

Director: Ti West

Cast: Mia Goth, Elizabeth Debicki, Moses Sumney, Michelle Monaghan, Bobby Cannavale, Halsey, Lily Collins, Giancarlo Esposito, Kevin Bacon

Release Date: July 5, 2024

Genre: Crime, Horror

Rated R for strong violence, gore, sexual content, graphic nudity, language and drug use.

Runtime: 1h 44m

Review:

Ti West closes out his Mia Goth lead horror trilogy with Maxxxine, a film bathed in every bit of imaginable 80's sleaze and clichés found in those low rent VHS thrillers such as 1984's student/hooker flick Angel.  West manages to capture the look and feel of those kinds of films impressively much like he did by recapturing the 70's grindhouse slasher aesthetic in X.  Its over the top but perfectly suited for the story being told as we follow Maxine's fight tooth and nail to survive and be a star.  Baked into the script a playful sense of meta humor as plenty of subtle references to previous films pepper the dialogue and visuals.  Its a clever wink and nod to what the series and its singular star have created in this surprising trilogy.  Sadly, the story isn't quite up to the level of the previous two film as it veers into downright goofy territory, especially in its final act, either intentionally or unintentionally.  At the very, least it brings the character's story full circle and allows to Mia Goth to shine throughout.  This entry isn't as showy as Pearl but Goth manages to communicate the level of dogged determination and her innate ability at self preservation baked into her character's DNA.  This turn is more nuanced and subtle throughout but doesn't make it any less engaging and engrossing.  A handful of familiar faces appear in supporting roles with Kevin Bacon leaving the biggest impression as a New Orleans PI on Maxine's trail.  Bacon gleefully chews up scenery every time he shows up on screen which make his and Goth's scenes together all the better.  Giancarlo Esposito is a bit more reserved as Maxine's agent/lawyer/fixer but he brings just enough of that Gus Fring energy to make you wish the film had utilized him more effectively.  Michelle Monaghan, Bobby Cannavale, Halsey, Moses Sumney and Lily Collins all are given one dimensional supporting characters which could have been more impactful as well.  Elizabeth Debicki is given a bit more to work with as the horror film director with higher aspirations that serves as a bit of a role model for Goth's Maxine especially once the film comes to a close.   Maxxxine maybe the weakest of the three films but that doesn't keep it from being a well crafted showcase for Goth who made the series something special.  

B-

MOVIE REVIEW: MANK

 

1930s Hollywood is reevaluated through the eyes of scathing wit and alcoholic screenwriter Herman J. Mankiewicz as he races to finish "Citizen Kane."

Director: David Fincher

Cast: Gary Oldman, Amanda Seyfried, Lily Collins, Arliss Howard, Tom Pelphrey, Sam Troughton, Ferdinand Kingsley, Tuppence Middleton, Tom Burke, Joseph Cross, Jamie McShane, Toby Leonard Moore, Monika Gossmann, Charles Dance

Release Date: November 13, 2020

Genre: Biography, Comedy, Drama

Rated R for some language

Runtime: 2 h 11 min

Review:

David Fincher’s Mank is a labor of love through and through.  Written by Fincher’s late father, it has been a passion project of Fincher’s since the late 90’s when he intended to film it after 1997’s The Game.  The fact that it has made its way to the screen after so much time is a testament to Fincher and the result is technically impressive and rather engaging especially for people who enjoy a bit of cinematic history.  Fincher gives the film a distinctive style by using cues and techniques in line with the golden age of cinema.  The dialogue also has a snappy back, and forth which make the film sing with a certain kind of lyricism.  It is a fascinating bit of cinematic alchemy which recalls 2011 Academy Award winning film, The Artist, where style is part of the character of the film.  It rises about that film with a stronger cast who are clearly having a blast in their roles.  Gary Oldman leads the film with great gusto using a voice inflection that sounds like Burgess Meredith in the Twilight Zone in the 50’s.  Oldman’s Mank is always the smartest man in the room, even when it is to his detriment.  The snappy dialogue flows naturally from Oldman as you follow this fascinating if somewhat tragic tale, he generally the most interesting person on screen but that is not to say his supporting cast isn’t more than up to the cast.  Amanda Seyfried turns in one of her best performances here, totally losing herself in the role.  She’s generally a capable actress but he she just seems far more committed than usual.  Charles Dance makes for a formidable Randolph Hearst but his scenes are few and far in between.  Similarly, I would have enjoyed a bit more screen time for Tom Burke’s Orsen Welles whose one scene with Oldman’s Mank is a late act treat.  Whether that interaction or any of them ever happened in real life is left up to the more dedicated viewer to research.  If there is a failing here is that’s while we follow Mank’s journey through his memories we are always kept at an emotional distance so that when the final scene plays you don’t feel the emotional punch as intended.  

B

Cindy Prascik's Review of Mank

 

My dearest reader(s): One of the sad casualties of 2020 has been what I will snobbishly call "cinema-worthy" movies, that is, movies that don't feel like they were made for TV. Sure, there have been some, but the pickings have been slim. I am pleased to report that last week Netflix threw a solid entry into the skimpy awards season fray with its original picture, Mank, the reasonably true story behind the writing of Citizen Kane.

Spoiler level here will be mild, nothing you wouldn't know from the trailer or if you're familiar with actual events, which, I assure you, I am not.

Disclaimers, away!

Folks, I hate old movies. That may seem like a weird thing to hear from someone who spends three-quarters of her free time watching movies, but it is the gods' honest truth. If it was made before 1970 and it's not the Wizard of Oz or something with the Marx Brothers, no thank you. Citizen Kane is frequently cited as one of the greatest — if not *the* greatest — films of all time. I couldn't be less interested. Mank is made in the style of those classic, old, black-and-white movies, and that certainly didn't help me warm to it.

On the flip side, Gary Oldman remains my favorite actor in the known universe, and my life has been way too short on Gary Oldman lately. Heck, for the last two years I haven't even had time to make my (in?)famous Gary Calendar; instead I've had to buy premade calendars, and I can assure you, those don't come in "Gary Oldman." A new Gary Oldman movie definitely represents one of 2020's few bright spots.

Art is, by nature, subjective, but, by any objective criteria I can mark, Mank is a pretty good movie. The story is interesting and well-told, jumping from Herman Mankiewicz toiling over the film's screenplay while recuperating after an automobile accident to flashbacks (always notated as they would be in a script) that give us the backstory: Who is Mankiewicz, and how did he end up where he is? Gary Oldman is nothing short of brilliant (she says with maybe a hint of bias), and I think Oscar buzz around his performance is well founded. The supporting cast is very much up to snuff as well, with solid work from Amanda Seyfried, Lily Collins, Tuppence Middleton, Sam Troughton, Tom Burke (yay!), and the always brilliant Jamie McShane. Directed by David Fincher, with a score by Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross, Mank also represents a little reunion of some people who helped create the film that *I* consider the greatest of all time: the Social Network. Other than running a little longer than it needs to, there's nothing practical I can call out as a negative, BUT...I struggled to get through Mank all the same. I was bored enough that at one point I had to put my phone in a drawer I couldn't reach to keep from goofing off instead of paying attention. If you're reading this, I guess you're interested in my honest opinion, so there it is: Mank is a good movie that I didn't like very much, but Gary Oldman makes it worth watching (as he always does).

Mank clocks in at 131 minutes and is rated R for "some language."

Give Gary Oldman another Oscar now, please and thank you. Of a possible nine Weasleys, Mank gets seven.

Until next time...

Cindy Prascik's Reviews of Tolkien & Pokemon: Detective Pikachu

This weekend it was off to the cinema for the disparate duo of Tolkien and Pokemon: Detective Pikachu.

Spoiler level here will be mild, nothing you wouldn't know from the trailers.

First up: Tolkien, chronicling the early years of one of the world's most celebrated and beloved authors. Regular reader(s) will know I make a point of not reading reviews until I write my own, but headlines I've seen in passing tell me most folks, including the Tolkien family themselves, don't like this movie.

Since the Tolkien family isn't noted for liking much of anything, I suggest putting that aside and giving the picture a fair shake. It's really not bad at all.

First we have a likable cast, fronted by Nicholas Hoult and Lily Collins. The material won't win anyone an Oscar, but the performances are quite enjoyable. There are plenty of nods to the things Tolkien fans will want to see...Balrogs and Nazgul and of course very powerful rings. These come mostly in the form of Tolkien's fevered battlefield imagination. Other influences come from Tolkien's real world, most obviously three close friendships formed in his school days. The references aren't exactly subtle, but the movie doesn't constantly beat you over the head with them either. Tolkien does not follow a linear timeline, but rather jumps back and forth between the author's school days to his World War II experiences and beyond. (It's worth noting that some of the war sequences do get a bit gruesome.) The film's meandering pace makes two hours seem a bit long, but it's an engaging enough story that it never lost my attention.

Tolkien clocks in at 112 minutes and is rated PG13 for "some sequences of war violence." If Tolkien isn't an especially memorable movie, it's a serviceable biopic that won't bore you, either. Of a possible nine Weasleys, Tolkien gets six.

Next on the docket, Pokemon: Detective Pikachu.

After his detective father is killed in an apparent accident, a young man happens upon the father's Pokemon partner and a mystery involving the two.

If Pokemon: Detective Pikachu were the worst movie ever, it would have every right.

The concept feels pretty thin, and little--if anything--I've seen at the cinema lately has been as jarring as Deadpool's voice coming out of that adorable little Pokemon. Curiously, though, each trailer got funnier and funnier, and, as it turns out, the finished product isn't half bad.

Let's start with Ryan Reynolds. Yeah...that voice probably still wouldn't be what I imagine for Pikachu, but this version of Pikachu is all Reynolds, and it's pretty hilarious. Justice Smith capably plays the straight man to Reynolds' wisecracking yellow cutie. Ryme City is loud and colorful and looks every bit the sort of bustling, progressive burgh where humans and Pokemon would live and work side by side. Action sequences are well choreographed and don't run on too long. The movie is great for kids, but there's a fair bit of grownup humor to entertain adults as well. Pokemon: Detective Pikachu runs 104 minutes and is rated PG for "action/peril, some rude and suggestive humor, and thematic elements."

Pokemon: Detective Pikachu is a fun movie that's a lot better than it should be.

Of a possible nine Weasleys, Pokemon: Detective Pikachu gets six and a half.

Until next time...

Cindy Prascik's Reviews of I’m Not Here & Extremely Wicked, Shockingly Evil and Vile

 

 

My frustration with the cinema experience ever-growing and the week's offerings being less than impressive, this weekend I again threw myself on the mercy of streaming services.

 

First up was 2017's I'm Not Here, a dull tale of a sickly older man reflecting on his past.

 

I'm Not Here is blessed with a couple of extraordinary leads in J.K. Simmons and Sebastian Stan, playing older and younger versions of the sad-sack main character, and it doesn't really seem to know what to do with either of them. Simmons speaks not one word of dialogue and spends most of the film staring sadly at himself in the mirror and blankly at everything else, an artistic choice that serves only to make his scenes--the bulk of the movie--seem interminable. Playing the man in his younger days, Stan at least gets to work a few different acting muscles, but the character is so broadly-drawn that there isn't much he can do with it. Both actors deserve better.

 

To say this picture is slow would be the understatement of the decade. In more deft hands the story might be moving, the lead character sympathetic. Under director Michelle Schumacher, it's a bad film school project, its emotional heft seemingly outside her ability to wrangle and its every turn so obvious you'll see it coming a mile away. While the tale is unquestionably sad, the telling lacks any ability to make the viewer sympathize.

 

I'm Not Here clocks in at an impossibly long 81 minutes and is unrated. It contains adult themes, drinking, and brief nudity.

 

I'm Not Here is a pitiful waste of two exceptionally gifted actors. 

 

Of a possible nine Weasleys, I'm Not Here gets three.

 

I'm Not Here is available for streaming and digital download via various platforms.

 

Fangirl points: Of *course* I only watched it because Sebastian Stan is in it!

 

Next up, Netflix' Ted Bundy biopic, Extremely Wicked, Shockingly Evil and Vile.

 

This most recent version of the oft-recounted tale of terror is based on a book by Bundy's longtime girlfriend Elizabeth Kendall. Its wordy name is lifted directly from court transcripts from the day Bundy's death sentence was handed down.

 

While lately Netflix is keeping pace (and sometimes outpacing) so-called "proper" cinema, this offering feels more like a Lifetime movie than anything you'd enjoy on a fifty-foot screen with a ten-dollar bucket of popcorn. Zac Efron, always better than I expect, is spot-on as Bundy, but the performance and the movie itself are somehow less chilling than they should be; there's just no grit. The supporting cast is filled with familiar faces, all of whom have proved more than competent, but--perhaps because the story and its outcome are so well known--it's difficult to invest in the proceedings. Well before the film's halfway point, my attention had wandered far from Ted Bundy, and the only reason I didn't turn it off was in hopes of more "Officer James Hetfield!"

 

Extremely Wicked, Shockingly Evil and Vile runs 110 minutes and is rated R for "disturbing/violent content, some sexuality, nudity, and language."

 

Extremely Wicked, Shockingly Evil and Vile is a lukewarm take on a story that's already been told too often. 

 

Of a possible nine Weasleys, Extremely Wicked, Shockingly Evil and Vile gets two.

 

Fangirl points:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

M-hmm. Until next time...

Cindy Prascik's Reviews of Pride & Prejudice & Zombies & Hail, Caesar!

 

 

 

Dearest Blog: Yesterday it was off to Marquee Cinemas for unlikely bedfellows Pride & Prejudice & Zombies and Hail, Caesar! 

 

Spoiler level here will be mild, nothing important that you won't have gotten from a couple of pretty awesome trailers. First on the docket: Pride & Prejudice & Zombies. A bit of classic literature gets the Walking Dead treatment. 

 

Oh, Jack Huston, the things I do for you. Nevermind the things I *would* do for you...the things I *do* do for you. Zombies are kind-of the "it" monster these days, but, being more of a vampire girl myself--and not having gone anywhere near Jane Austen since a forced high-school acquaintance--I might have taken a pass on PPZ if not for the presence of the talented and dashing Mr. Huston. 

 

Not surprisingly, though, it was a far less annoying experience than that Nicholas Sparks disaster I was forced to watch last year. Getting the obvious out of the way first: If you look at the name "Pride & Prejudice & Zombies" and think "That's stupid!" well...this isn't the movie for you. 

 

Like Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter, the concept's chief appeal is in its utter ridiculousness. PPZ isn't quite as tongue-in-cheek as one might expect, but it's still good fun. Highlights include a strong leading turn by Lily James, a solid array of impressive female heroes, nice costumes, good fight choreography, and some sweet zombie effects. 

 

Like World War Z, these undead don't just shuffle along; if you're running, odds are they can catch you. Of all the non-traditional aspects of PPZ, that one is, perhaps, the most disquieting! On the downside, it takes a full 39 minutes for Jack Huston to appear onscreen. (Did I clock it? Yes, I did.) Sam Riley is so miserable looking throughout I feel sure he'll be tapped to play Athos in some future version of The Three Musketeers. 

 

The movie's not overlong, but it does feel slow at times; a little trim might have served it well. Pride & Prejudice & Zombies clocks in at 108 minutes and is rated PG13 for "zombie violence and action and brief suggestive material." 

 

A definitive answer to Hollywood's female problem, Pride & Prejudice & Zombies is a good time that's well worth a look. 

 

Of a possible nine Weasleys, PPZ gets seven. 

 

Next on my agenda: Hail, Caesar! In 1950s Hollywood, a studio "fixer" has his hands full when a marquee name goes missing. 

 

My smarter, funnier cousin once said that the Coen brothers' idea of a comedy is about the same as Iron Tail's idea of coloring Easter eggs. (If you're young, look it up.) I don't find that as true here as it sometimes is, but their humor is an acquired taste; if you don't love Hail, Caesar!, you'll probably hate it. 

 

Though the movie's been touted as a love letter to Hollywood's Golden Age, if we're being honest, it's more of a hate letter, spotlighting everything hilariously stupid about the big studio experience of the 50s. Josh Brolin is fantastic in the lead and, even after all these years, it does my tiny heart good to see his name atop such a list of Hollywood A-Listers. 

 

George Clooney's buffoonish superstar is a laugh every time he's onscreen. Channing Tatum continues to surprise as a real asset to seemingly every movie that'll have him. (And does he have the MOVES!) 

 

I wouldn't be me if I didn't name check a couple of my favorites who turn up in roles so small the characters don't even have names: Fisher Stevens and Patrick Fischler. 

 

Great to see ya, guys! Hail, Caesar! features a solid mystery that ties together the various movies within the movie. The film is consistently funny, with some laugh-out-loud moments, and boasts top-notch performances from a bunch of top-notch names, as well as charming choreography from the master, Tony winner Christopher Gattelli. 

 

There's also a small cameo by Mr. Jack Huston, which allows me to deem yesterday a "Jack Huston Film Festival." Day = Made! Hail, Caesar! runs 106 minutes and is rated PG13 for "some suggestive content and smoking." 

 

The finished product falls a little short of its stellar trailer's promise, but Hail, Caesar! is a fun, clever picture that should please most moviegoers. 

 

Of a possible nine Weasleys, Hail, Caesar! gets seven. 

 

Hope everyone enjoys their Super Bowl Sunday. Until next time...........yay, football!! 

 

Cindy Prascik’s Reviews of The Mortal Instruments: City of Bones / The World's End

Dearest Blog, this weekend's cinema offerings were a hodge-podge of dread and great anticipation, respectively, The Mortal Instruments: City of Bones and The World's End.

Spoiler level here will be mild, nothing you wouldn't know from the trailers.

First up was another in Hollywood's seemingly-endless stream of teen supernatural thrillers, The Mortal Instruments: City of Bones.

When her mother goes missing, a young girl discovers she has the blood of a Shadowhunter, that is a secret league of demon-hunting warriors.

Oh, Aidan Turner, the things I do for you. Not the things I would do for you--which are many, varied, and profane--but the things I do do for you, such as paying good money to watch this.

It is my understanding that the Mortal Instruments series was initially based on Harry Potter fanfiction, as the inexplicably popular 50 Shades of Gray series is based on Twilight fanfic. Note to Hollywood: please stop making movies based on fanfiction. You're embarrassing yourself.

City of Bones is derivative and shallow, but the bigger problem is the same one that has plagued recent seasons of True Blood and Once Upon a Time, that is, it introduces such a jumble of characters that often the story it really wants to tell is nowhere in sight. These secret Shadowhunters and their demon enemies, while far from original, could have been interesting enough, but by the time you mix in vampires and werewolves and time travel and a little daddy-angst to boot, what you're left with is a pretty big mess. Much of the dialogue is cringe-worthy, and parts of the film were so awful I threw my hands over my face in dismay. The flip side of that is, other than being far too long, the movie honestly isn't boring, and there are some bits that are really pretty good. Most stabs at humor hit the mark, although there were also several times my cinema was cracking up over stuff that clearly was not meant to be funny.

Lily Collins and her mighty eyebrows do a passable job in the lead. Her male counterparts, Jamie Campbell Bower and Robert Sheehan, are the movie's highlights, both quite engaging. As is the norm these days, all my favorites are relegated to "somebody's mom"- and "somebody's dad"-type roles. The fetching Mr. Turner has less to do than I'd have liked, but more to do than I expected, so we'll call it a draw. Playing the otherworldly is old hat to Turner by now, so of course he does a fine job of it. It's nice to see Lena Heady, Jared Harris, Kevin Durand, and CCH Pounder in smaller roles, but the real scene-stealer is Jonathan Rhys Myers in his usual over-the-top fashion.

The Mortal Instruments: City of Bones runs 130 minutes and is rated PG13 for "intense sequences of fantasy violence and action, and some suggestive content."

The good news is it's not as bad as I expected. The bad news is it's still pretty bad.

Of a possible nine Weasleys, The Mortal Instruments: City of Bones gets four and a half.

Next up was the genius Edgar Wright's latest offering, The World's End.

A group of once-inseparable friends reunites to complete a legendary pub crawl. When they return to their hometown, they discover things are not quite as they remember.

Dear Blog, it is well known that I worship at the altar of Wright/Pegg/Frost. It would be fair to say, along with The Hobbit, The World's End is my most-anticipated film of the year. I am pleased to report my enthusiasm has been well placed.

This story of five friends, who have drifted apart in the two decades since they left school, is sincere and likely feels familiar to most adults on my side of 40. Sympathetic performances from Nick Frost and Eddie Marsan are the dramatic highlights, while Simon Pegg gets to be the funnyman this time around. Favorites Paddy Considine and Martin Freeman are also terrific. On the sci-fi side, the idea isn't necessarily anything new, but it's well executed with some pretty cool effects. Both sides of the plot--the situation among these five friends, and the fantastic happenings in their old hometown--are interesting from start to finish; the story never misses a step. Edgar Wright and Simon Pegg deserve full marks for writing a film that goes in so many directions, yet never feels like it's lost its way. All the pieces fit perfectly.

The World's End clocks in at a perfectly-paced 109 minutes and is rated R for "pervasive language, including sexual references."

The World's End defies categorization. It's comedy, it's sci-fi, and it's genuinely moving drama, all at the same time.

It is also (*trumpet fanfare*) the first film of 2013 to earn a perfect nine of a possible nine Weasleys. And, damn, This Corrosion sounds fine in surround sound!!

Until next time...




Admit it, he could make you do worse things than sit through a lousy movie...

[Trailer] MIRROR, MIRROR

About as far removed from the tone of last week’s Snow White and the Huntsman, Tarsem Singh's Mirror Mirror has an almost comedic tone with Julia Roberts chewing up scenery like a crazy. Lily Collins does seem like a more suitable Snow White in my opinion.

Singh’s visuals, as usual, are incredibly impressive but it’s a totally different genre on the same material, should be very interesting to compare and contrast when both projects come out…..

MOVIE REVIEW: PRIEST

ON VIDEO

PRIEST



In a world ravaged by wars between humans and vampires, a renegade priest fights to rescue his niece from the legions of bloodsuckers who seek to transform the young girl into one of them. A battle-weary veteran of the last vampire war, warrior Priest (Paul Bettany) now resides in a heavily fortified city where the ruling Church is a greater menace than any creature of the night. When a pack of vampires abduct Priest's niece (Lily Collins), the vengeful holy man breaks his vows and promises to save the young innocent from a fate worse than death. He can't do it alone, but with a powerful warrior Priestess (Maggie Q) and his niece's boyfriend, a sharp-shooting sheriff (Cam Gigandet), on his side, Priest may have a fighting chance. Stephen Moyer, Karl Urban, and Brad Dourif co-star. ~ Jason Buchanan, Rovi

Director: Scott Charles Stewart

Cast: Paul Bettany, Karl Urban, Cam Gigandet, Maggie Q, Lily Collins, Stephen Moyer,
Christopher Plummer, Brad Dourif

Release Date: May 13, 2011

Rated PG-13 Intense sequences of violence and action, disturbing images and brief
strong language

Runtime: 1 hr. 27 min.

Genres: Action/Adventure

Review:

Priest is kind of like a dollar store Frankenstein monster of a film. It’s made up of so many sources that it’s hard to keep track of them. Occasionally, director Scott Charles Stewart hits the sweet spot with a few cool visuals or ideas that look like they could spring into something but just never do. Instead, you are left to trudge through a Blade Runner-esque world before heading into a Western-esque post apocalyptic world mixed with as many clichés as you can think of, throw it in a blender and call it a day. Paul Bettany string of truly questionable role selections, he’s really a fine actor, continues here as he looks like a holy roman Jedi while carrying the same demeanor he had in the woeful Legion, also directed by Stewart. Bettany looks like he came straight from that set and just had a quick wardrobe change and went right to work. Not that there’s much he can do given the script but he tries, in fact he’s so serious throughout that he could be passing a diamond as the movie progresses. Cam Gigandet is tasked with being his partner in their heroes quest and he distractingly bad in a bad film. Gigandet reads lines like a first year acting student, leaving you wondering if that was really the best take they could possibly get from him or if everybody was just in a rush to go home. The lovely Maggie Q looks lovely and cool in limited screen time. Karl Urban is mostly wasted as the villain here, in the sparse amount of time he’s given he looks like he’s begging to do some actual work but just isn’t ever asked. Christopher Plummer and Brad Dourif pass through on their way to other films. The strange thing and probably biggest sin Priest commits is that’s its actually fairly watch able, helped by it’s scant run time and brisk pacing, if it actually had any sort of worthwhile script it might have made for a solid B movie.

C-