Police Academy 4: Citizens On Patrol (1987)

I have a terrible confession – I absolutely adore the Police Academy movies (well, at least the first four). If you were a child in the 80s, the Police Academy movies were unavoidable (I rented them multiple times from the video store and watched them whenever they aired on television).   Police Academy 4 was my favorite out of the lot, for reasons that I will get into later.  In his movie guide, Leonard Maltin gives the first movie a (fair) two and a half star review, but gives a BOMB rating to the rest of the  series (with the exception of the one and half star rating he gives to Police Academy 3).  I don’t want to harp on Maltin too badly here (as I have in the past) because his negative reviews are not exactly out of line.  The problem I have with four (sometime five) star rating system is that, while it’s an apt barometer when it comes to the quality of movies, it leaves very little room in terms of actual film analysis for a movie (yes, even the Police Academy movies are worthy of film analysis). When Maltin gives a BOMB rating to a movie, is he implying that it has no redeeming qualities whatsoever? Is it really that offensive to the human senses? If you have read my blog before (all five of you), then you know it is my position that even the worst movies often have some value to them (if not from a narrative stand point, then certainly from a historical one).

The first Police Academy had a fairly conventional narrative, while the sequels were more episodic in structure. The first movie is more in line with Animal House and Caddyshack with its raunchy humor (there is female nudity and lots of sexual humor - the most famous scene is when Commandant Lassard is trying to give a lecture while a prostitute, hidden in the podium, gives him a blow job.) While Animal House is a classic of the genre, I have never really understood the classic status that has been granted to Caddyshack. Sure, there are a few funny scenes with Bill Murray, but it is laden with one of the least charismatic lead actors in movie history - Michael O' Keefe as Danny. Steven Guttenberg, while often the butt of many Simpsons jokes, is a much livelier lead than O' Keefe, and at least his character, Carey Mahoney, is given an actual character arc.  Danny's main struggle is whether or not he belong with the snobs (uptight rich white men) or the slobs (laid back rich white men). There is really not much at stake. However, enough with the Caddyshack bashing, let's get back to the review. 

As the  Police Academy series rolled along they became  more slapstick (and kid friendly) in nature.  In Police Academy 5: Assignment - Miami Beach, there is a scene where Tackleberry pulls a gun on an intruding shark and then orders it to leave the beach area – it was only inevitable that there would be a Police Academy cartoon and comic book.  The first movie, while shot on a small budget, is fairly cinematic while the sequels often resemble TV sitcoms (the director of Police Academy 4, Jim Drake, directed plenty of television sitcoms before helming this movie).  When the series went full slap stick, the role of Mahoney was greatly reduced to make room for more colorful supporting characters – most notably the motor mouthed Zed, the gun enthusiast Tackleberry, the nerdy Sweetchuck, and Jones, the walking sound effects machine.  

I want to note that, while I may personally enjoy the Police Academy series, the mainstream critics are more than justified in their extreme dislike for them, especially Police Academy 4.  After watching it again for this review, I was surprised by how disjointed the movie was (it looks like it was edited by a chainsaw): story lines are introduced only to be abandoned: Tackleberry’s father in law announces he wants to join the new police program and disappears after his one scene; the sleazy lawyer, Butterworth, apparently has a scheme to make Lassard’s (Citizen On Patrol –C.O.P.) new program work to his benefit and then is practically relegated to an extra.

Characters often disappear for a long stretch of time: Hooks’ role is practically a cameo; Sharon Stone’s character, reporter Claire Mattson, mainly exists so she can pilot a plane in the movie’s finale; and finally, there is very little urgency in the actual narrative (Harris wants the C.O.P. program shut down, but that’s more of an idle threat).  It is a sloppily made movie that is overcrowded with characters, and recycled gags from the previous movie, and this begs the obvious question – Why do I like this movie? 

Well, here are just a few reasons: 

1.    Zed/Laura romance.   

 It was only natural that Zed be given a love interest (after all, Tackleberry was given one in Police Academy 2); she comes in the form of the bookish Laura, who Zed first meets while giving a lecture at a woman’s club. It certainly helps that Corinne Bohrer is genuinely funny and holds her own against Goldthwait’s mugging.  This is essentially the heart of the movie, Laura doesn’t want to change Zed, she accepts him for he is and Zed realizes that he is lucky to have her.  In fact, the movie should really end with Zed and Laura flying off in a hot air balloon, instead of Mahoney and Claire, the generic love interest.

2.    The pairing up of Captain Harris and Proctor.   

 Police Academy 4 was the first movie to pair up the tyrannical Captain Harris with the childlike Proctor, to great effect.  It’s not too surprising that in the next two movies the focus is more on them than the Academy regulars, because, frankly, they are more fun to watch. Proctor is an interesting character – there is a sense that he is a genuinely good guy who has been influenced by the wrong crowd.  There is no malice in his actions; he just wants to win the approval of his superiors.  There is a delightful moment in Police Academy 6 that, through a set of contrivances, Proctor is forced to commodore a city bus to chase after the villain but, rather inexplicably, decides to pick up passengers along the way. It is  absolutely chaotic – with passengers being tossed about in their seats as Proctor speeds through the downtown area.  He finally drops off the passengers and, as they are exiting the bus, a little girl walks up to him and says, “You are much better than the regular driver.” Proctor, of course, takes great pride in this, while all Harris can do is roll his eyes.  

3.   It is the most surreal of the Police Academy movies. 

 I’m a big fan of surrealism, therefore, it’s surprising just how surreal Police Academy 4 is at times (though, I’m sure it’s unintentional).  In one of its most nonsensical moments, Arnie is paddling on an exercise bike, only for it to break off its supports and roll right into a swimming pool. However, rather than get off the bike and swim to the surface, Arnie continues to ride the bike underwater. He keeps peddling away, completely oblivious to his watery surroundings.  In another scene, the gang plays a prank on Proctor by lifting the port a potty he’s in and placing it in the center of a football field. They detach the sides and Proctor is sitting on the toilet, in the middle of a football field, while the crowd looks on.  The National Anthem beings to play and rather walk off the field in embarrassment, Proctor stands up and places his hand over his heart.  In one of the funnier moments, a group of criminals manage to break out of prison by tricking Proctor into playing a game of Simon Says. 

4.   It’s an interesting time capsule.  

Police Academy 4 beings with Mahoney and Jones jamming to a rap song (“Citizens on Patrol”) that is playing on the radio. This wouldn’t be so unusual in 2016, because rap has become a part of mainstream culture, but in 1987, rap music was just starting to get embraced by white audiences (in 1986, Run – DMC did a cover of “Walk This Way” with Steven Tyler doing guest vocals and Joe Perry on guitar; The Beastie Boys released “Licence to Ill”), therefore it was a bit jarring to see a studio financed movie (albeit a low budget one) open up with a rap song.  It also has my favorite of all subplots – the wacky skateboarders. Skate boarding, like rap, had been a subculture for some time, but it really picked up momentum in the 1980s, thus it was something the producers could exploit.  At one point, the movie comes to a complete stand still to give us a montage of cool skateboard stunts (one of the skateboarders is a young Tony Hawk). It is extremely gratuitous, but my eight year-old self thought it was awesome. 

5.   TV version vs. the theatrical cut.

  One of the main reason I chose Police Academy 4 to review, as opposed to the earlier entries, is to highlight the differences between the theatrical version and the television cut (that aired in the 1980s). In many ways, at least from a narrative stand point, the television cut is superior to the theatrical version. It does a much better job of establishing characters and setting up the ending. In the theatrical version, Sharon Stone's character (reporter Claire Mattson) is a complete nonentity; there is a brief moment that establishes her as Mahoney's love interest and then is forgotten about until the movie's climax. Her relationship with Mahoney (and Captain Harris) is expanded upon in the television cut, and she is given something of arc (she goes from being skeptical of Lassard's program to being sympathetic towards it). It is baffling as to why the scenes were cut, because not only do they show character development, but both are rather funny (Harris nearly gets ripped apart by Claire's dog). 

  The television cut also has one of the funniest scenes in the entire series - Sweetchuck apprehending a purse snatcher. He cases the thief into a fun house and, realizing that the culprit is twice his size, decides to trick the man into surrendering. Sweetchuck starts barking orders to his "fellow officers" and then cautions Jones to careful with "that bazooka." After hearing that line, the thief gives up and it's only after Sweetchuck has handcuffed him that he realizes he's been duped. It's not only a funny scene, but it actually sets up the finale to the movie - the man who Sweetchuck arrests (Zack) is the one who leads that jail breakout at the end.  

6.    In the commentary for the first movie, producer Paul Maslansky says the main reason for the success of the Police Academy franchise was because they weren’t “mean spirited." The Police Academy movies were, essentially, a counterpoint to the violent action movies of the 1980s. While Schwarzenegger and Stallone were indiscriminately blowing away the bad guys, the misfits of Police Academy didn't spill blood and would often find nonlethal ways to capture the villains:

       Jones would use his vocal talents to trick gang members into believing they were been shot at;  the elderly Miss Feldman thwarts a bank robbery by driving a motorcycle through the front window.  

      It is also refreshing that when they did a major slip up, the movie called them out on it, rather than glossing over the fact (Miss Feldman, Laura, and Butterworth manage to ruin a sting operation).  The Police Academy series were incredibly optimistic movies where people from different backgrounds (rich, poor, black, white)  got together for the greater good of society. The characters evolved throughout the course of the series; in Police Academy 2, Sweetchuck is constantly being harassed by Zed and his gang - by the time part four rolls along they have become a good friends. Sure, it's not as exciting as John Rambo taking down the entire Vietnamese Army by himself, but it's much, much nicer.  

Credits
Cast: Steve Guttenberg (Sgt. Mahoney), G.W. Bailey (Captain Harris), Michael Winslow (Sgt. Jones), David Graf (Sgt. Tackleberry), Bobcat Goldthwait (Zed), Corinne Bohrer (Laura), Bubba Smith (Sgt. Hightower),  Tim Kazurinsky (Sweetchuck), George Gaynes (Commandant Lassard), Sharon Stone (Claire Mattson), Brian Backer (Arnie), David Spade (Kyle), Leslie Easterbrook (Lt. Callahan), Lance Kinsey (Proctor), Billie Bird (Mrs. Feldman), Tab Thacker (House), Marion Ramsey (Sgt. Hooks), Derek McGrath (Butterworth), Scott Thomson (Sgt. Copeland), Brian Tochi (Officer Nogata), Randall "Tex" Cobb (Zack),
Colleen Camp (Sgt. Kathleen Kirkland - Hightower), Andrew Paris (Officer Bud Kirkland), Arthur Batanides (Mr. Kirkland), Jackie Joseph (Mrs. Kirkland), George R. Robertson (Chief Hurst).

Director: Jim Drake
Screenplay: Gene Quintano
Running Time: 88 min.

Star Wars: The Force Awakens(2015) and other observations

I’ve been reluctant to write about the Star Wars saga on this blog, largely because there is really nothing more to be said. Just type in the words Star Wars on any search engine and you will likely come across more than a million results.  My Star Wars fandom is limited to the original trilogy - I don’t like the prequels and have never read a Star Wars novel/comic book in my life. It used to annoy me how  hardcore Star Wars fans insisted that Boba Fett survived the events of Return of the Jedi, because they read it in a Star Wars novel.  The fascination with Boba Fett has always baffled me, especially considering his death in Return of the Jedi is treated as a punch line, but I digress. While the rest of the internet was a buzz over The Force Awakens, I was fairly indifferent. However, when my sister offered to buy me a ticket to the movie, I figured, “Why not? It certainly can’t be any worse than Attack of the Clones,” and promptly accepted her invitation.  I was pleasantly surprised.  The best thing I can say about The Force Awakens is that it felt like a genuine Star Wars movie, by which I mean that it is focused entirely on the adventure – there isn’t an awkward romance, there are no boring senatorial debates, nor, thankfully, an annoying comedy sidekick that kills every scene he is in.The young protagonists (Rey, Finn, and Poe) are likable and have character arcs. It’s nice to see Harrison Ford actually put effort into his performance as Han Solo (compare this with his acting in Return of the Jedi, where he looks bored the entire time, and you will spot the difference).  The movie occasionally pays fan service (the holographic chess game from the first movie makes an appearance), but it not as distracting as it was in the prequels – at least, there is a genuinely good reason for Chewbacca to be in the movie.  It’s definitely worth seeing at the big screen at least once. However, rather than write a long winded review, I am going to list a few observations, about the entire Star Wars Saga, instead.

1.       PLOT HOLES.
There’s a huge difference between plot holes and nit picks. Most of the “plot holes” that people complain about in The Force Awakens are nit picks.   How does Rey speak Wookiee?” Who cares? Do we really need a ten minute scene that show a ten year-old Rey learning Wookiee? It's also fairly easy to forgive the real plot holes in the Star Wars: The Force Awakens, because it is a fantasy movie. Star Wars has often, mistakenly, been labeled as science fiction, when in reality it has more in common with a movie like The Wizard of Oz than it does with 2001: A Space Odyssey. The “science” in Star Wars is more of a plot device that allows the characters to get from point A to point B; The Millenium Falcon is on par with the magic carpet in The Thief of Bagdad. How often do you hear people complain about gaping plot holes in The Wizard of Oz? I can assure you there are plenty, but that doesn’t make it a less enjoyable movie. 

2.       WHAT’S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE FORCE AWAKENS AND THE PREQUELS?
The Force Awakens, structurally speaking, isn’t anything new. In fact, critics are correct in pointing out that it is essentially a “loose remake” of the original movie. Yet ,it vastly more entertaining than the prequels and that’s largely because the characters are for more engaging. Let’s compare The Force Awakens with The Phantom Menace:
Rey, Finn, and Poe are likable character with distinct personalities. Th  main characters in The Phantom Menace are complete flatlines:  Qui Gon is a pretty pointless character, Obi-Wan is practically an extra (until the climactic light saber battle), and Padme glowers the entire movie. Anakin is annoying child who is also revealed to be “the chosen one.” Whenever a scene shows promise, Jar Jar Binks will open his mouth and absolutely kill the moment. The protagonists in The Phantom Menace rarely display any genuine emotion and spend most of the movie talking in circles.
Rey is essentially the “Luke Skywalker” character of The Force Awakens, she is stuck on a desert planet, but has greater aspirations in life. She is a perfect surrogate for the audience, just like Luke was in the original movie. Finn is a turncoat storm trooper who is having an identity crisis - he was born and raised to be soldier - but he shows undying loyalty to Rey and true bravery. a  Note: I absolute refuse to call the original Star Wars “A New Hope,” because that would be buying into George Lucas’ revisionist take on the series. The movie in its initially release was simply Star Wars – A New Hope was added to the title in 1981. The flaws in the prequels could have easily been overlooked had the characters been more engaging. The acting isn't always the problem, most of the time it is the writing, and this bring me to my next point...........

3.       HAYDEN CHRISTENSEN IS NOT A TERRIBLE ACTOR!
Hayden Christensen has been  maligned for his performance as Anakin Skywalker in the prequels.  However, I actually think Christensen did a fine job in the role – at the very least, he gave it his all, unlike most of the actors in the prequels – and that he is more of a victim of bad writing/bad directing. Even a more accomplished actor couldn’t make the infamous “I don’t like sand” line work.  George Lucas wrote Anakin as a petulant brat and Christensen, rather successfully, brought his director’s vision to life.  Anakin is poorly written, but not poorly acted. 

4.  TOO MUCH STAR WARS?
While, I immensely enjoyed The Force Awakens,and am looking forward to Episode VIII, I got to admit that I bit apprehensive about all these Star Wars spinoff movies that are in development. How many Star Wars movies do we really need? If they are not any good, they could easily diminish the enthusiasm for Episodes VIII and IX.  What made the original Star Wars movie so exciting was that it was a truly unique movie going experience in 1977. It was a breath of fresh air in a truly cynical time, now, unfortunately, with all these upcoming spin offs it threatens to become just another cash cow franchise. 

Cast: Harrison Ford (Han Solo), Daisy Ridley (Rey), John Boyega (Finn), Adam Driver (Kylo Ren), Oscar Isaac (Poe Dameron), Domhall Gleeson (General Hux), Peter Mayhew (Chewbacca), Carrie Fisher (Princess Leia), Lupita Nyong’o (Maz Kanata), Andy Serkis (Supreme Leader Snoke), Max von Sydow (Lor San Tekka), Anthony Daniels (C-3PO), Gwedoline Christie (Captain Phasma), Simon Pegg (Unkar Plutt), Mark Hamill (Luke Skywalker).

Director: J.J. Abrams
Screenplay: Lawrence Kasdan, J.J. Abrams, Michael Arndt.
Running Time: 136 min. 

Sorority Row (2009)/The House on Sorority Row (1983)

What separates a “good” Slasher film from a “terrible” one is the level of talent involved with the project – a genuinely talented filmmaker can take a fairly routine script and elevate it to a higher level.  Imagine if Psycho would have been directed by a studio hack instead of Alfred Hitchcock? It would not be regarded as the classic it is today and would, more than likely, been lost to time.  The House on Sorority Row and its remake, Sorority Row, are not in the same class as Psycho, but both are a cut (pun intended) above your standard Slasher movie. 

The most striking thing about both films is that they are fairly well directed and have some truly haunting visuals.  The House on Sorority Row is merely passable for its first seventy minutes, but is redeemed by its truly tense finale.  It ups the stakes by not only having the heroine (Katherine) fight off the killer, but doing so in a drugged out a state – she is injected with a tranquilizer by Dr. Beck, who wants to use her as bait to trap the killer. The movie effectively blurs the lines of reality; Katherine constantly has to fight off hallucinations brought on by the drug, while doing her best not to get caught by the killer.  Its fairly reminiscent of the dream sequence in the Brian DePalma movie, Sisters – this is not too surprising as the director, Mark Rosman, was an assistant to DePalma for a brief period of time. The House on Sorority Row also borrows heavily from the Bob Clark classic, Black Christmas, especially with the reveal that the killer has been living in the sorority house attic the entire time. The remake never matches the original's intensity, but there some genuinely eerie visuals - I especially like the shot of the girls walking through their sorority house to find it has been completely trashed and, thus, resembling a complete hell on earth. It's an appropriate setting for the heroine, Cassidy, to nearly lose her soul.  It's evident that the director, Stewart Hendler, knows his stuff. 

Sorority Row is a loose remake of the 1983 film – the plot point it lifts from the original movie is a sorority prank that goes horribly wrong.  In the original movie the prank involves the strict house mother, Mrs. Slater, who objects to the girls throwing a graduation party at the sorority house. The prank goes horribly awry, when Vicki, the party girl of the group, accidentally shoots Mrs. Slater with a gun. The girls, after deliberating for a few minutes, decide to cover up the murder and, for the time being, dump Mrs. Slater’s corpse into the swimming pool until they can figure out what to do with it. The girls go on with their graduation party, despite being completely on edge, and are picked off one by one by an unseen killer.  

In the  remake the prank is far more elaborate (and nonsensical) -  Megan wants to get revenge on her cheating boyfriend, Garrett, so she, along with her sorority sisters, come up with one of the most contrived revenge plans in film history:  Megan’s friend, and Garrett’s sister, “Chugs” gives Garrett a couple of pills to slip into Megan’s drink to make her more co-operative, and while the two of them are making love in her bedroom, Megan starts to have seizure and begins to foam from the mouth. Garrett thinks the drugs have killed her and rushes to get her sorority sisters. This is, of course, a ruse to teach Garrett a lesson.  Jessica, the alpha sister, convinces Garrett that they must cover up the "accident", and so they drive to an abandoned well to hide the “body.” Meanwhile, Megan tries to hold back her laughter. The rest of the girls are a bit disturbed by Garrett’s hysterical behavior and want to call the prank off, but Jessica talks them out of it. When they arrive at the abandoned well, Jessica suggests they look for sharp objects to chop up Megan’s body with, and, not surprisingly, everything goes to hell when Garrett impales Megan with a tire iron.  The girls decide to dump Megan’s body in the well with Cassidy being the only hold out in the group.  

This part of the movie is extremely flawed and strains credibility, for a couple of reasons:

1) How far was this prank supposed to go?  You would think that Megan faking a seizure and foaming at the mouth would have been adequate enough. Garrett is absolutely freaked out by this and is a blubbering mess. It is also revealed that Garrett’s cheating was a result of Megan cheating on him first. So neither party is entirely sympathetic.
2) Why do the other girls so along with Jessica?  The other girls (Cassidy, “Chugs,” Ellie, and Claire) are all unnerved by Garrett’s hysterical behavior, yet still go along with the prank because they don’t want to let Jessica down. This makes sense for the characters of Claire and Ellie, but Cassidy is a fairly strong willed, and compassionate, person, hence it is completely out of character for her to go along with the cruel prank. She most certainly would have blown the whistle once she realized how dangerous it was getting.  It makes even less sense for “Chugs,” considering that she is Garrett’s older sister and, despite him being a complete tool, does genuinely care for him. She should have stopped the prank once she saw the toll it was taken on her brother’s mental state.  Why does Megan lay still the entire time?
3) Why do the girls leave Garrett alone? Given Garrett’s state of mind, it would have made sense to have someone stay by his side the entire time, yet the girl’s leave him all alone, while they pretend to search for a “sharp object.”  This is maybe the most bone headed movie in movie history.  I understand that there is no movie without Megan’s accidental death, but it’s hard to suspend my disbelief for this scene. It is the weakest link in the entire movie and I nearly turned the movie off at that very moment. Thankfully, it does improve as it progresses.

Sorority Row, while based off the 1983 movie, greatly owes its structure to the 1997 Slasher, I Know What You Did Last Summer.  Both movies feature an accidental death and a cover up, and then flash forward to a year later (well, technically nine months in Sorority Row, but close enough). In The House on Sorority Row, the events happen over the course of one day. The heroines in both movies (Cassidy in Sorority Row/Julie in Last Summer) are adamant about calling the police after the accident has occurred, but are overruled by their friends. They are still racked with guilt over what happened the previous year and are reluctant to delve into their past (Cassidy reluctantly agrees to go to her sorority house’s graduation party, while Julie is reluctant to go back to her hometown after finishing her first year of college). The heroines in both movies have kept their distance from their one time close friends (Cassidy has moved out of the house and donates her time to charity work, while Julie has locked herself in her college dorm room). There's a lot of misdirection in both movies, especially in the reveal of the killer (though, the reveal in Sorority Row is more indebted to I Still Know What You Did Last Summer, only done in far more competent manner). In Sorority Row, the characters receive sinister texts from the killer, while in Last Summer, they receive letters. 

Sorority Row greatly benefits from its leading actress, Briana Evigan. She gives a very compassionate, and sincere, performance as Cassidy and helps elevate the movie from being unbearable to totally watchable.  Though, she is greatly assisted by Leah Pipes as the extremely bitchy, Jessica. There is a nice dynamic between the two characters – Cassidy is a borderline saint, while Jessica is a complete narcissist.  However, it is to the movie’s credit that even Jessica, despite her callous behavior, is a sympathetic character.  Her reason for wanting to cover up Megan’s death is that her boyfriend, Kyle, is the son of a Senator seeking the Vice-Presidential nomination, thus any scandal linked to him might ruin his bid.  The acting in the original is a bit spotty at times, but Kate McNeil gives a rather effective performance as Katherine - she extremely convincing in the movie's climax, where Katherine is on the verge of losing her mind. 

It also helps that Sorority Row has a sense a humor about itself. There are a lot of funny dialogue exchanges through out the movie, but my favorite one has to be:

Jessica: Please God, don’t let me get killed. Please God, don’t let me get killed.
Cassidy: Stop giving him ideas. 

Plus, any movie that casts Carrie Fisher as a shotgun wielding house mother can’t be all bad. The main flaw of the original is takes itself a bit too seriously and all the characters are rather dour. It gets a lot of stylistic points, but a sense of humor would have elevated it to classic status. 

Credits:

Sorority Row (2009)
Cast: Briana Evigan (Cassidy), Leah Pipes (Jessica), Rumer Willis (Ellie), Jamie Chung (Claire), Audrina Partridge (Megan), Margo Harshman (Charlene “Chugs”), Julian Morris (Andy), Caroline D’Amore (Maggie), Carrie Fisher (Mrs. Crenshaw), Matt O’ Leary (Garrett), Matt Lanter (Kyle), Maxx Hennard (Mickey), Nicole Moore (Joanna), Ken Bolden (Dr. Rosenberg), Rick Applegate (Senator Tyson).

Director: Stewart Hendler
Screenplay: Josh Stolberg, Pete Goldfinger
Running Time: 100 min

The House on Sorority Row (1983)
Cast:  Kate McNeil (Katherine), Eileen Davidson (Vicki), Janis Zido (Liz), Robin Meloy (Jeannie), Harley Jane Kozak (Diane), Jodi Draigie(Morgan), Ellen Dorsher (Stevie), Lois Kelso Hunt (Mrs. Slater), Christopher Nelson (Dr. Beck), Michael Kuhn (Peter), Michael Sergio (Rick), Charles Serio (Eric).
Director: Mark Rosman
Screenplay: Bobby Fine, Mark Rosman
Running Time: 91 min.

Area 51 (2015)

The Blair Witch Project is one of the worst things that ever happened to cinema, not only is it vastly overrated and irritating, but it spawned the whole found footage subgenre that has been plaguing the movie theatres for the last decade.  However, at least The Blair Witch Project had a clever marketing campaign (it was promoted as being real footage) that stirred up audience interest, the later found footage movies tend to relegated to DVD purgatory, until they are eventually picked up by Netflix.  There are a few found footage movies I do like (V/H/S, V/H/S 2, and Evidence), but these are the exceptions rather than the rule.  The V/H/S movies are an anthology series that have some genuinely creepy stories, effects, and editing.  Evidence has a framing device that justifies the found footage:  two detectives hope that videos taken by the victims at a murder scene can lead them to the killer. Also, a credible reason is given for the victims to continue recording, despite their lives being in jeopardy – they know their inevitable fates, but hope that their video footage can help apprehend the killer.  Though, in all honesty, Evidence is a pretty bad movie that I just have a soft spot for. 

Area 51 represents everything I find loathsome about the found footage genre –bland acting, an over use of the shaky cam to add “tension” to the proceedings, and totally irrational behavior by the lead characters.  The “plot” centers around three bros (Reid, Darrin, Ben) who hope to break into Area 51. They join up with an attractive woman, Jelena, whose father used to work at the facility, and all sorts of hilarity….er I mean horror ensues.  Of course, we already know that they are going to come to a bad end, because the movie tells us right off that bat– the movies opens with a documentary crew interviewing the relatives of the three men, bemoaning the fact that they might never see them again. Way to diffuse the suspense there, movie.   

Ben, the horniest one out of the lot, is reluctant to go along with the plan and threatens to back out on several occasions, only to have his mind changed by Reid, the weirdo of the group.  While Ben maybe a douche bag, he is the only one in the group that exercises common sense – hell, I think he might have been onto something when he suggested that instead of going to Area 51, they should spend the weekend in Vegas.  Ben, however, doesn’t actually sneak onto the base, he is the getaway driver. I was personally hoping that the movie would end with Reid and company running for their dear lives across the desert (while aliens and military men chased after them) only to find, to their abject horror, Ben had ditched them. The movie would then cut to Ben in Las Vegas, hitting on beautiful showgirls, and gambling all of his money away.  No such luck!  

I’m also baffled by Darrin’s behavior – he’s all gung ho about breaking into the base, until it is revealed that Jelena is going along. It is only then that he gets a bit apprehensive about the plan, but thankfully, stupidity triumphs and he listens to Reid.  Jelena is, I guess, there to supply the eye candy…..I really don’t know her function because she really adds nothing to the movie, other than, “Hey, this looks familiar.” Now, I’m sure a fan of Area 51 will argue that Jelena is the most important character in the movie, but the fact is that Reid could have sneaked into the base without her assistance. Plus, she is nothing but a burden once they get in.  

Reid, as you probably have guessed, is the ring leader and a complete nutcase – he is a recovering alien abductee.  He constantly jeopardizes the mission by either breaking into houses, or standing in the middle of the road.  I’m actually making this movie sound a lot more interesting that it really is. Trust me, watching Area 51 is on par with watching two hour movie about a tractor slowly driving down a road and occasionally stopping, while the driver takes a gulp of water. 

I would talk about the technical merits of the movie, but they are none. The camera is either constantly shaking, zooming in on things, or completely out of focus. It never remains still, because a steady camera simply isn't scary.  When the filmmakers REALLY want to amp up the terror, they turn on the night vision. OOOHHH!  


There are a lot of jump cuts in the movie, which is odd, because this is supposed to be “found footage,” which means it should be unedited. Plus, given the fact that there are hostile aliens in captivity at Area 51, you would think that there would be much tighter security on the base – the only real threat standing between Reid and his buddies from getting into the underground facility is the friggin’ night janitor. The security guards pose no threat, because they always have their backs turned towards our protagonists.  If only the janitor would have seen Reid hiding in that cubicle, then maybe, just maybe, tragedy could have been avoided.  

Credits
Cast: Reid Warner (Reid), Darrin Bragg (Darrin), Ben Rovner (Ben), Jelena Nik (Jelena), Roy Abramsohn (Jim Nelson), Frank Novak (himself), Glenn Campbell (himself ), Conception West (waitress), James Decker (Kooky Local).
Director: Oren Peli
Screenplay: Oren Peli, Christopher Denham.
Running Time: 91min.

Final Exam (1981)

The majority of Slasher movies are pure crap! The documentary Going to Pieces: The Rise and Fall of the Slasher Film tries to offer up a defense for the subgenre, but the cold hard truth is that most criticisms of Slasher films are pretty valid. They are fairly indistinguishable from one another, devoid of any real suspense, and are extremely predictable.  That being said, it is hard to think of a movie (regardless of genre) that is as dull as Final Exam.  Sure, most Slasher movies are terrible, but they usually move at a fast pace and have a few likable characters in the cast;  Final Exam not only lacks both, but it is fairly bloodless, which means it won’t even appeal to gore fans.  The director, Jimmy Huston, said that he wanted to avoid the stereotypes of the genre by making the killings bloodless and having most of them occur off screen – it’s too bad his determination to avoid clichés didn’t carry over to the characters.  All the tropes of the genre are here in their full glory:  Courtney, the shy, virginal heroine; Lisa, the beautiful, but ditzy blonde (who is sleeping with her Chemistry Professor); Wild Man, the dumb jock; Mark, the star athlete (who hair is shaped like a helmet); and Radish, the awkward nerd (who has a morbid fascination with serial killers).

The first hour of the movie is nothing but talk, with the occasional shot of the killer lurking about thrown in for good measure; I normally wouldn’t fault a movie for wanting to develop its characters, but none of these people are remotely interesting. The performances are so over the top (with the exception of leading actress, Cecile Bagdadi) that the characters often come off as South Park caricatures than real people – this is especially true of Wild Man. The nonstop mugging by the supporting cast is not only obnoxious, but it tends to overwhelm Bagdadi’s more restrained performance, to the point that she is a non-entity. Though, the character of Courtney is a bit perplexing – she never joined a sorority because she doesn’t like the hazing, yet she is friends with Mark, the biggest douche bag on campus, and often finds his bullying of pledges humorous. In reality, a girl like Courtney wouldn’t want anything to do with Mark because he is the embodiment of everything wrong with the world. 

The character of Radish is equally perplexing; I initially thought the character was gay – his mannerisms and eccentricities are consistent with gay stereotypes of the 1980s – but then it is revealed that he harbors romantic feelings towards Courtney.  In an extremely awkward scene (which, to the movie’s credit, is played in a fairly realistic manner) Radish, after stumbling for the right words, tells Courtney that she is beautiful. Of course, this scene doesn’t lead to anything as (SPOILERS) Radish gets offed by the killer. The character of Radish is meant to be a bit of misdirection by the filmmakers - he is the one that discovers the corpses of Wild Man and Mark, and attempts to contact the police. However, the sheriff won't listen, because he assumes it's a prank - earlier in the movie, Mark's fraternity staged a fake mass shooting, and Radish, unaware that it was a ruse, called the sheriff down to the campus. This, naturally, pissed the sheriff off and he vowed not to be fooled by any more college pranks. When the sheriff refuses to listen, Radish decides to take charge of the situation and the audience assumes that he will be the hero of the movie. However, just seconds after he is finally given a character arc, Radish bites the dust.

I personally suspect that the movie initially began as an Animal House ripoff, but when the filmmakers realized how horribly unfunny their movie was, they opted to turn it into a Slasher movie. It would explain why much of the running time is devoted to the pranks that Mark’s fraternity plays on other college students.  The two most common complaints about Final Exam is that the killer doesn’t wear a mask and that the killer doesn’t have a back story, as if either would make a difference.  There is no logical reason for the killer to be wearing a mask, he’s not trying to hide his identity nor has his face been horribly scarred. In Slasher movies, the killer’s motivation is NOT important, it’s just a plot device that leads to the gore and nudity. If Michael Meyers is only after Laurie Strode, then why does he kill random people? Does Jason, supposedly, witnessing his mother being killed justify his killings in the next seven movies? 

The filmmakers try to spice things up with some unusual camera angles – a lunch tray is given a point of view shot – but these are more head scratching than tension building. My favorite shot has an extra centered in the foreground with her face in a medium closeup, while Courtney (frame right) is gathering up her belongings in the background. WHY? I don’t know! Maybe it’s so supposed to represent how Courtney views herself in the grand scheme of things; small and insignificant. Though, I think the more likely explanation was that Jimmy Huston was attempting a Citizen Kane- like shot and believed that this fit the bill. 

Also, what is up with the musical score? It’s more suitable for a TV about teenage pregnancy than a Slasher movie. I half expected the killer to have a heart to heart with his victims instead of brutally murdering them.

Credits 

Cast: Cecile Bagdadi (Courtney), Joel S. Rice (Radish), DeAnna Robbins (Lisa), Ralph Brown (Wild Man),Sherry Willis-Burch(Janet), John Fallon (Mark), Terry W. Farren (Gary), Timothy L. Raynor (Killer),Jerry Rushing (Coach), Sam Kilman (Sheriff), Don Hepner (Dr. Reynolds), Mary Ellen Withers (Elizabeth),Shannon Norfleet (Boy In Car), Carol Capka (Girl In Car).

Director: Jimmy Huston
Screenplay: Jimmy Huston.
Running Time: 90 min.