Tag Archives: little bits of movies

Cobra Kai: The References

So earlier this year, a sequel T.V. show to The Karate Kid film franchise launched on YouTube Red called Cobra Kai. Picking up the story 30 years after the end of the 3rd film, the show continues the story of Daniel (Ralph Macchio) and Johnny’s (William Zabka) decades long rivalry. You can watch the first two episodes for free too on YouTube.

I didn’t have a lot of interest in the show at first, but when an old friend (thanks Mike) suggested I should check it out, I decided to do a full retrospective of the entire The Karate Kid franchise… and I ended up enjoying the show a lot more than I thought I would. Cobra Kai is a brilliant show, one that pays respects to the film series and yet does its own thing at the same time. I loved it so much that I watched the whole thing twice and it was while enjoying the series for the second time when I noticed a lot of in-jokes, references and call-backs to not only the film franchise but also fan theories over the years. The second season of Cobra Kai is filming as I type this and set to be released next year. So to pass the time until then, I thought I’d take a look a the many, many Cobra Kai references from season one. Now, I’m not sure that I caught everything but I’m going to cover as many as I noticed.

If you’ve not seen Cobra Kai yet then check it out as it’s brilliant. Also, SPOILERS ahead too as some references give away plot points.

Episode 1: Ace Degenerate

This one kicks off showing the fight that ended the original film. But it also features some new shots, angles and even previously unused footage not shown in the movie. Johnny still likes his red cars, in the show he now has a bright red Pontiac Firebird while in the movie he had a bright red Avanti convertible – I guess it would be too much to expect the same car three decades later. But it still shows that Johnny likes red cars.

Cobra Kai Johnnys Car

It’s also shown that Johnny is now living in the Reseda area of L.A., which is where Daniel and his mother moved to in the film. Plus Johnny is now working as a odd-job/maintenance man which is the same job Mr. Miyagi held. Then, when Johnny’s car is hit and towed away, the company is called “Pat’s Towing” which could (or could not) be a reference to Mr. Miyagi actor Pat Morita… maybe?

When Johnny and Daniel finally meet in the show after 30 years, Johnny makes reference to the fact that Daniel should’ve been disqualified as his infamous crane-kick hit Johnny in the face and it’s made clear at the start of the tournament that blows to the face are illegal. It’s a much discussed plot hole among fans of the film. Also while at the car dealership, Daniel introduces his cousin Louie and in the films he had an uncle Louie. There’s a chance uncle Louie named his son after himself.

Episode 2: Strike First

While talking to Miguel Diaz, Johnny recites a Cobra Kai mantra (“A man confronts you, he is the enemy. An enemy deserves no mercy.”) and even signs off by saying “What is the problem Mr. Diaz?”. Which is exactly what John Kreese says to Johnny in the first film and even signs off by saying “What is the problem Mr. Lawrence?”.

When talking to his wife, Daniel mentions how he was pushed off a cliff while on his bike. Aside from some hyperbole from Daniel, he is referencing when Johnny and the Cobra Kai students pushed Daniel off his bike and down a hill in the first film. There is also a brief flashback showing Daniel teaching his daughter karate, he says “True karate is here, here but never here” while pointing to parts of her body from her head to her stomach. This is something Mr. Miyagi taught Daniel in the film.

Cobra Kai Daniel Flashback

Daniel invites his daughter’s boyfriend, Kyler round for dinner and at that dinner he mentions how he got his sashimi knife during his first visit to Okinawa which is a reference to the second film. Also during the dinner, Daniel questions Kyler on his injuries especially his black eye and hand. Mr. Miyagi also does this to Daniel in the first film after he is beat up by the Cobra Kai students.

At the Cobra Kai dojo, Johnny has Miguel clean the windows. Miguel asks if he should clean the windows a specific way… which is an obvious set up for a “wax on, wax off” joke, but Johnny says he doesn’t give a shit.

Episode 3: Esqueleto

While at dinner (again) and discussing his daughter going to the Halloween dance Daniel mentions him being a chaperone, he goes on to say how his mother used to drive him on dates which is a reference to the date he and Ali went on in the first film in which his mother drove the love birds.

Cobra Kai Original Date

As Johnny trains Miguel (rather brutally) at the swimming pool, he says “Cobra Kai never dies”, which is a reference to the mantra said in both the first and third films. Then at the Halloween dance later in the episode, Miguel turns up in the same infamous and iconic skeleton costume Johnny wore in the first film. And as Johnny is walking trough the school, he sees a picture of Ali from the first film.

Episode 4: Cobra Kai Never Dies

To be honest, this one is a little light on the references as it spends a lot of time with the new characters instead of the older ones. Well the title of the episode is a reference I’ve already covered with that previously mentioned mantra of the dojo.

This is a tenuous one I admit, but Daniel makes Bananarama pancakes for breakfast, Bananarama performed the song Cruel Summer which appears in the film. When Kyler and his friends bully Miguel in the library, one of Kyler’s cohorts says “I think he’s gonna cry.” This is the same line said by one of the Cobra Kai students to Daniel in the first film in the locker-room before the tournament begins.

Episode 5: Counterbalance

Johnny says “This isn’t a knitting class, it’s a dojo.” to Miguel. John Kreese says the line “This is a karate dojo, not a knitting class.” in the first film to Mr. Miyagi.

As Daniel sets up his dojo at home, he hangs a rule of karate on the wall, this is the same rule (rule 2) Mr. Miyagi has on his dojo and teaches to Daniel in the second film. Plus the country club Daniel frequents in the show (seen a lot in this episode) is the same club where he gets covered in spaghetti from the first film after seeing Johnny and Ali dancing together – the Encino Oaks Country Club.

Cobra Kai Daniel Karate Rule

As Daniel performs a kata near the end of the episode, he strikes the exact same pose he used in the third film’s final fight and the music in the background is the same as the music in the first film’s finale.

Episode 6: Quiver

This one opens with a young version of Johnny showing us his past. We see him ogle some motorbikes, which is something featured in the first film and then young Johnny discovers the Cobra Kai dojo for the first time. He looks through the window and can see and hear a young John Kreese talking to students – the audio used is taken directly from the first film. Funnily enough, the audio used is taken form a scene in the first film that Johnny was in.

Cobra Kai Johnny Flashback

Johnny teaches his students a simple one-two jab punch. This is the same punch John tells Johnny to use to warm up the students in the first film. Daniel is doing some katas when Robby asks him what he is doing. Daniel explains how they are the foundation to Karate, Mr. Miyagi teaches Daniel the same kata and says the same thing in the third film.

Johnny walks past this students in the dojo saying “Fear does not exist in this dojo does it? Pain does not exist in this dojo does it? Defeat does not exist in this dojo does it?” John did the same thing in the first film.

Episode 7: All Valley

This one opens with a very familiar scene as Daniel has Robby do some chores around the car lot including waxing cars. This is Daniel teaching Robby Karate the same way Mr. Miyagi taught him. And when Robby is finished waxing the cars, Daniel asks “Both lots?”. This is a nod to when Mr. Miyagi asks Daniel to paint the fence. Then Robby get upset that he’s not being taught Karate at all and accuses Daniel of using him to just do chores, the same thing happened to Daniel with Mr. Miyagi.

As Johnny is looking through his karate magazine, he sees an ad for the All Valley Karate Championships. The design for the ad is almost identical to the original save some colouring and a date change.

Cobra Kai Ad

Miguel and Sam go on a date to the Golf n Stuff which is the exact same place Daniel and Ali went on their date in the first film. Many of the shots and actions are recreated too including the opening crane shot, having their photo taken in a photo-both, playing mini golf, etc. The whole scene is full of nods and references to the original film.

Johnny learns that the Cobra Kai dojo has a lifetime ban from entering competition. This is a plot point carried over from the third film when John Kreese and the dojo are given a life time ban due to the events of the film. It also makes sense that Johnny knows nothing about it as he was not part of the third film.

Episode 8: Molting

Johnny wears a red jacket in this one (he really likes red) and it looks a lot like the red jacket he had in the first film. Meanwhile at Daniel’s home, he gets a visit from his mother, Lucille and she is played by the same actress as the original film – Randee Heller. Lucille also references the time Daniel was pushed of his bike down that hill… or cliff according to Daniel. She also describes Daniel’s eyes as “baby browns”, something she did in the film.

Cobra Kai Lucile

Johnny recaps the events of the first film while talking to Miguel… only there’s a twist (more on that later). But he mentions several characters from the the flick including Ali, and some of the old Cobra Kai students. When Daniel trains Robby, he wears a baseball catcher’s mask and chest protector, just like Mr. Miyagi did with Daniel in the film. He also mentions about power coming out of one inch of his fist, which is what Mr. Miyagi also said to Daniel.

Cobra Kai Original Training

Miguel discovers his girlfriend, Sam with another boy. A boy she has no interest in, but Miguel misunderstands the situation. Daniel did the same when he saw Johnny and Ali at the country club.

Episode 9: Different But Same

Johnny arrives at Daniel’s house and says “You still can’t leave well enough alone.” This is a reference to the first film when, after the Halloween dance, the Cobra Kai students catch Daniel and Johnny says “You couldn’t leave well enough alone, could you, you little twerp?”.

While test driving a car, Johnny calls Daniel “Danielle”. One of Johnny’s fellow students, Dutch, also referred to Daniel as “Danielle” in the locker room before the big fight in the first film. Also while on the test drive, they stop at Daniel’s old apartment complex where he and hos mother lived in the first film. Then Johnny mentions kicking Daniel’s “ass around the corner”, which is a reference to the Halloween fight in the film. Of course Daniel quips back “how’d that end?” which is referencing Mr. Miyagi beating the crap out of the Johnny and the Cobra Kais.

Cobra Kai Halloween Fight Original

Then while at a bar having a drink together, Daniel and Johnny talk about the spaghetti calamity at the county club as well as well as referencing a few other things from the films including the opening of the second film. Daniel also says he knows where Ali is now (possible set-up for a cameo in season 2?).

Episode 10: Mercy

The scoreboard for the karate tournament is in the exact same style and colours as in the original film. The Cobra Kai gis are also the exact same style and colour as they were in the film. Of course the infamous crane-kick make an appearance when Miguel uses it to score his first point to mock Daniel. The whole tournament has plenty of references to the big fight from the film, Johnny making a fist aimed at one of his students – just as John Kreese did, the semi-finals are announced the same way, one of the Cobra Kai get disqualified for using an illegal move and many more.

Cobra Kai Crane Kick

Robby gets taken out of the competition with an injury, just as Daniel was. Then back in the locker room Daniel rubs his hands together, just as Mr. Miyagi did when readying himself to heal Daniel… only this version has a different resolve. Then when Robby returns to the tournament after his injury, the announcer exclaims, ” Daniel LaRusso’s gonna coach!” – which is a twist on the line “Daniel LaRusso’s gonna fight!” from the first film.

The episode ends with Daniel taking Robby to his old training grounds… Mr. Miyagi’s house. It’s complete with the old cars (especially that yellow Ford Super Deluxe convertible). Then they go into the garden and it looks just as it did in the film, all while the famous Bill Conti music plays in the background. Only that’s not quite the end…

Cobra Kai John Kresee

Back at the Cobra Kai dojo, Johnny get an unexpected visitor – John Kreese, his old sensei, still played by Martin Kove and with a big, fat stogie in his mouth. Setting up for a hell of a confrontation in season 2.

Bonus Reference

As a nice bonus reference. There has been a fan theory for years that Daniel was actually the bully in the original film and Johnny was the victim. Plenty of people have covered this theory and you can read one example here. Well in the show, Johnny is not really the bad guy. He’s a bit of a loser, a drop-out sure – but he’s also shown to be sympathetic and caring. While Daniel is shown to be a more antagonistic, likes showing off his wealth, popularity and success.

Cobra Kai Johnny Talk

It’s almost as if Johnny is the victim here and Daniel is the bully… kind of like the fan theory. In fact, in episode 8, Johnny tells the story of the original film to Miguel – but he tells it as if he was the victim. In-keeping with the fan theory thing. It’s a nice bit on the part of the writers to include such a reference and even base the whole show off.


 

There’s a lot of fan-service in the show (some references I’ve not covered, some I’ve not even noticed myself) yet it never feels forced. The writers have crafted a wonderful series with Cobra Kai that while fresh, still has one foot in the 80s and the original three films.

Bring on season 2, I can’t wait.

Advertisements

Not Your Usual, “Is Die Hard A Christmas Movie?” Article

Yup its that time of year again. The annual celebration we like to call Christmas is back and I bet that if you typed “is Die Hard a Christmas movie” into Google (or your choice of interwebs search engine), you’ll find dozens of articles all asking that particular question and all with differing answers. Most sites keep regurgitating the exact same article from the previous years too just with a few wording tweaks and many offer “a new poll” which, as I’ve noticed seems to switch results every year. Last year a poll said yes Die Hard is a Christmas film but this year it’s a no. It’ll be a yes again next year.

I have been writing this blog for a few years now and never bothered to offer my own insight and answer to this age old query, until now. Except I don’t want to do what everyone else does with a simple yes or no – I want to not only answer but also explain my answer.

This summer saw the 30th anniversary since Die Hard was released and I’ve been doing Die Hard based articles all year in celebration. So it only seem fitting to tackle this sticky subject as part of and to end my 30th anniversary celebrations. But before I get to my opinion and answer to the query, lets see what some people connected to the movie say…

Are They Right?

Die Hard screenwriter Steven E. de Souza already put his view across a while back and he says it is. However Bruce Willis has said its not when he was quoted during his comedy roast by saying:

“Die Hard is not a Christmas movie. It’s a god damn Bruce Willis movie!”

– Bruce Willis

Bearing in mind, that was (as mentioned) during a comedy roast. So I’m guessing Bruce was trying to be funny. Plus there is the fact he’s getting old and senile too – I mean back in 2007 he said that Live Free or Die Hard is better (at times) than the original.

“It’s at least as good if not better at times that the first film.”

– Bruce Willis

As I said, senile. So what Bruce says about the original being a Christmas movie or not is moot… seriously it’s as good as if not better than the original? Bruce needs to be put down – it would be kinder.

Now I Have A Machinegun

I suppose that is really the crux of my point, it’s opinion. When it comes to this question everyone falls into one of three categories.

  1. You have the naysayers, the ones that refuse to see Die Hard as a Christmas flick.
  2. You have the opposite, the ones who will say it is a Christmas movie every year until they die.
  3. Then you have the third group, the ones that just don’t give a fuck.

People say it’s not a Christmas film because it has nothing to do with Christmas… and they’re right from a plot point of view. Then there are those that say it is a Christmas movie because it takes place over Christmas Eve – but is that enough? For me, no. But I will come off as very hypocritical next as it’s now time for me to answer that yearly question – is Die Hard a Christmas movie? Well…

Die Hard Jumpers

Those are my Christmas jumpers for this year, what do you think my opinion is? Still, I said earlier how I don’t just want to answer but also explain my answer. And this is where the hypocrisy will come in. No, I don’t think that Die Hard being set at Christmas is enough to qualify it as a Christmas flick. I feel the same way about that other controversial choice too, Lethal Weapon. I love me some Riggs & Murtaugh and I think Lethal Weapon is a damn fine picture… but it’s not a festive flick to me despite it being set at Christmas just like Die Hard.

What Is A “Christmas Movie?”

Yet something like Batman Returns or Gremlins? Yup, I see those as Christmas films despite the fact they have little to do with the festive season other than the setting. I did pre-warn you about the hypocrisy. Die Hard gets shot down as a festive film just because it’s set at Christmas but the plot has nothing to do with the holiday… yet Home Alone is always lauded as a “Christmas classic” when it is only set at Christmas but plot-wise? What does a really annoying kid fending off two really fucking stupid burglars have to do with the Yuletide season? So what is Die Hard ignored as a Christmas flick because it has nothing to do with the season and only set in it – but others in the same boat get a free pass? You don’t see “Is Home Alone a Christmas movie?” articles year after year do you?

This line of reasoning can be applied to films that no one would argue against being a Christmas film. Take my all time favourite festive flick – It’s a Wonderful Life. Usually at near the top if not at the top of a lot of Christmas film lists…. but why? The opening of the film and the end are set in and around Xmas sure, but the majority of the story has absolutely nothing to do with the silly season at all. George Bailey thinking life would be better of he was dead is a story that could’ve been told any time of the year, not specifically Christmas. Yes it being (hardly) set at Christmas gives it a little lift, a bit more gravitas. But the core of the plot and meaning behind it – that could’ve been told in the Spring and still got the same message across right?

Its A Wonderful Life

What about the all time, undisputed classic A Christmas Carol? I love this story. No matter how many times it is told and re-told, I never get bored of it. Form the Alastair Sim starring 1951 Scrooge, the Bill Murray take from 1988 with Scrooged to the greatest version of the tale yet – The Muppet Christmas Carol from 1992. It’s a story that has been done dozens up on dozens and dozens of times from 1901 onward. Yet it’s another one that is considered a “Christmas classic” when it really has little to do with Christmas outside of it’s setting. Yeah I know what you are thinking – how dare I? But just look at the plot for a second. it’s about a miserly old man learning to be more generous and friendly. Let me put it this way, keep the same plot, same characters, ghosts everything –  only change the setting from Christmas Eve to October 31st and you have an effective Halloween film about a mean old bastard scared into being nice by ghosts of his past and even Death itself.

Seriously, What Is A Christmas Movie?

Of course there are films that are not only set at Christmas but also have a plot that is cemented in the festive season. Miracle on 34th Street as an example. It’s a film about a man trying to prove his is the real Santa Claus. It’s kind of hard to get a more Christmasy film than that. You can change the setting, but the plot is still about someone proving they are the real Santa. But what about something that features the real Santa but is hardly set at Christmas at all? I present the short film Father Christmas from 1991 based on the books by Raymond Briggs, the man behind another all time Christmas classic, The Snowman. Have you ever seen Father Christmas? (the short film not the real dude). It basically tells the story of what Santa does the rest of the year when it’s not Christmas. For those not in the know, he goes on holiday and says “bloomin'” a lot. It’s a film about Father Christmas that has little to do with Christmas itself… yet it’s a definite “Christmas classic”.

Father Christmas

And that really is my point, it’s hard to pin-down what makes a Christmas movie a Christmas movie. You can have Christmas films that have plots and characters centric to the season. There are ones that are only set at Christmas but from a plot point of view have nothing to do with the holiday. Then there are some that feature Christmas characters at the centre, but story/plot wise have little to do with Noël. So where does Die Hard fit into all of this? I said earlier how I don’t consider Die Hard a Christmas movie just because it’s set at Christmas. Yet I do see it as a Christmas flick none the less… and so this is where the explanation comes in.

This Is What A Christmas Movie is…

Back to the Future, The Wizard of Oz, Raiders of the Lost Ark and Rocky III. So what do all those films have in common? Well they’re all Christmas flicks. Maybe I should clarify, they are all Christmas films to me specifically. See here in England in the 80s when I grew up, we only had four T.V. channels at the time and these channels would always battle year after year to get the big films shown over Christmas, sometimes it would be a T.V. premier too. It was a wondrous time of year for the young film-fan me as I got to watch plenty of flicks. I’d probably watch more films over the 2 week Christmas holiday from school than I would the rest of the year. A lot of first time views of these films for me comes from Christmas and so they go on to be forever associated with Christmas to me personally, despite their settings, plots or characters. Then there is the other thing I connect Christmas to – family. I still remember and miss those family gatherings every year. Let me take one film from those above as an example with Rocky III and continue my explanation.

The film itself has nothing to do with Christmas I know. Yet the first time I saw Rocky III was on T.V. in the 80s over Christmas (I think 86?). I still remember the day vividly. Nan and Granddad came over on Christmas Eve and stayed with us. We opened our presents in the morning and I got an X-Wing, toy not a real one. We’d had a huge traditional dinner around 1 PM before The Queen’s Christmas Message came on the telly at 3 as Nan would never miss that. Me and my brothers got to play with our new gifts for a while before we had to tidy up. And then later that evening, Granddad snored away in his favourite armchair, sleeping off that huge dinner as the big film, Rocky III came on T.V. I sat on the sofa next to Nan and she put her arm around a 10 year old me and we both sat there watching Sylvester Stallone punch the crap out of Mr. T.

Rocky III

Whenever I watch Rocky III even now it reminds me of that Christmas Day and so is, for me, a Christmas film. it has nothing to do with Christmas, no Christmas characters, story or plot and not even a hint of a Christmas setting. Yet it will always be a Christmas movie because of that memory.

Same goes for Die Hard (finally), I don’t consider Die Hard a Christmas film because it’s set at Christmas, it helps I admit – but it’s not the reason it’s a Christmas flick to me. The reason is because I first saw it over Christmas. I was way too young in 1988 to go to the cinema to watch Die Hard. But when it was released on VHS, I remember my older brother Rob coming home one day with a copy and we watched it together a few days before Christmas. From that day in 1989 to this, I always watch Die Hard on Christmas Eve as a tradition. Now I’m an adult, I pour myself a large glass of Jack Daniels, plonk myself into a nice & comfy leather armchair, then sit back and relax as Bruce Willis shoots terrorists (who said they were terrorists?) in a skyscraper. I’m not satisfied until Hans Gruber falls from Nakatomi Plaza. And I’ll be doing the same this Christmas Eve too 29 years after that very first time.

Hans Gruber falling

 

That is what a Christmas film is. It doesn’t have to have a Christmas theme or plot or characters, nor does it need to be set at Christmas either. A Christmas flick is one you watch over Christmas because it gets you in the mood, it sparks off a festive memory, a film you watch because it’s Christmas not because it’s a Christmas film.

Is Die Hard a Christmas movie? For me, yes and it’s up there with the likes of Back to the Future, The Wizard of Oz, Raiders of the Lost Ark and of course Rocky III.

John McClane Christmas

Have a good Christmas folks. Oh and yippee-ki-yay mother fuckers.

Good And Bad Die Hard Rip-Offs

When it was released in 1988 (happy 30th), Die Hard was a revelation in action films. It took a lot of the clichés most other action films were guilty of overusing and turned them on their head. Die Hard blew film-goers away and can still hold it’s own against other actions films released now. It became as massive success and went in to spawn a huge franchise in it’s own right, not just with movies – the sixth of which (called McClane) is in production as I write this. But there were Die Hard games, comic books and all sorts of memorabilia. And I’ve been celebrating three decades of Die Hard all this year with numerous articles covering the film. 

Die Hard Art

Credit to Chris Weston over at Xombiedirge.com for this amazing fan-art.

The staggering success of Die Hard gave birth to an often used motif in action cinema, the Die Hard rip-off. For years and still even today, whenever an action film is released that features a usually lone hero going up against bad guys and normally in a confined setting, it gets lumbered with the “Die Hard on/in/at a…” label. So in no particular order or preference, here are some good and bad Die Hard rip-offs. 

Skyscraper – (A.K.A Die Hard In A Skyscraper)

Skyscraper

No, not the recent Dwayne Johnson flick of the same name, this is the 1996 Skyscraper  that took the idea of Die Hard and set it in a skyscraper… like Die Hard. Implementing the now often overused idea of the gender swap and making the hero and heroine. Starring cough “actress” Anna Nicole Smith and swapping the human and everyday main with a heart characteristics of John McClane with big tits.

Anna Nicole Smith plays Carrie Wink, a helicopter pilot who finds herself caught up in a plot involving terrorists and something to do with electronic devices… I’m not 100% sure what the plot is about to be honest or of there really is one. I’m pretty sure this film only exists to show-off Ms Smith’s breasts, at least they are the only two things I remember about the film anyway.

This is bad, this is really, really bad. But I guess Anna Nicole Smith was nice to look at.

Sudden Death – (A.K.A Die Hard At A Sports Stadium)

Sudden Death

This Jean-Claude Van Damme starring flick came out in 1995 and has “The Muscles From Brussels” taking on bad guys till Sudden Death. Released when Van Damme as at the top of his game and making a name for himself as a bankable action hero.

Set in a hockey arena, Van Damme plays fire marshal Darren McCord (its almost McClane) who attends a big hockey game with his son and daughter. While at the game, a group of terrorists arrive and hold various V.I.Ps  hostage in a luxury suite. McCord steps up to save the day and the lives of his children as the terrorists plan on blowing up the stadium when the hockey game ends unless their demands are met. 

To be honest, this one is half decent. I do love some JCVD and while this is far from his best, it’s also far from his worst. Plus you get to see JCVD kick a penguin.

Passenger 57 – (A.K.A Die Hard On A Plane)

Passenger 57

From 1992 comes this high octane and cliché ridden (such as using phrases like “high octane” to describe and action film set on a plane) picture with Wesley Snipes. At the time Snipes wasn’t really known for action flicks but soon became an action star after this one… a bit like Bruce Willis with Die Hard really. 

John McClane… sorry, John Cutter played by Snipes is a retired United States Secret Service agent who now teaches self defence to flight attendants. While struggling to come to terms with the death of his wife during a botched robbery, Cutter is offered a new job as the vice president of a new anti-terrorism unit. Cutter is the 57th passenger on a flight to Los Angeles (where was Die Hard set again?) to attend a meeting regarding his new job. Oh and on the same flight is psychopathic terrorist Charles Rane being escorted by two FBI agents. Shortly after take off, things go wrong when Rane and his cohorts take control of the plane leaving Cutter to save the day.

Snipes is a good action star and this was his first proper stab at the genre. The plot is very predicable but it’s a good film overall. Always bet on the one that isn’t red.

Air Force One – (A.K.A Die Hard On A Plane)

Air Force One

Yes even the Die Hard rip-off begin to rip-off the rip-offs eventually. This one is from 1997 and stars the legend that is Harrison Ford. An impressive all star cast join Ford in this high octane (sorry) action flick set in on the most famous plane in the world.

So Ford plays U.S. President James Marshall (J.M, John McClane?) who after attending a diplomatic dinner in Moscow, boards Air Force One to return to America. Only for Russian terrorists posing as the press to seize control of the plane and take hostages. Marshall is rushed to an escape pod for his own safety… only he never leaves and stays on-board to save the lives of his wife and child along with the other hostages.

So you’ve got Harrison Ford, a legendary action hero – going up against Gary Oldman, a legendary bad guy. Ford mumbles his way through the film as Oldman chews the scenery like he’s not eaten in a month… and it’s glorious.

Con Air – (A.K.A Die Hard On A Plane)

Con Air

Okay so now the rip-offs are ripping off the rip-offs that are ripping off the rip-offs… I think. Also from 1997 comes this other high octane (last one I promise) plane based action film. With Nicolas Cage in the main role.

Cage is Cameron Poe, an Army Ranger who’s honourably discharged after killing a man who tired to attack his pregnant wife. Poe serves ten years in prison but is paroled two years early. He has to take his final trip home to reunite with his wife and see his daughter for the first time, as a prisoner aboard The Jailbird – a flying prison transport along with several other prisoners being transported to other jails. Of of course the bad guys take control of the plane leaving Poe to clean up the mess.

Of all the Die Hard on a plane rip-offs (there’s a lot of them), this is my favourite. Cage is brilliant as the hero with a heart plus you have John Malkovich playing the main villain. 

Under Siege – (A.K.A Die Hard On A Boat)

Under Siege

“I’m just a cook”, Steven Seagal liked to tell people back in 1992 as he continually punched people in the face on board a Navy battleship in Under Siege. At least it made a change from a plane right?

So Seagal plays Casey Ryback, he’s just a cook (honest) on board the USS Missouri. A musical band land on the battleship to entertain the troops… only they turn out to be a band of mercenaries who take control of the ship. As it turns out, Ryback is a little more than just the cook (he lied) as he’s a highly trained and experienced Navy SEAL who specialises in anti-terrorism tactics. So of course he kills the bad guys, gets the girl and saves the day. Not bad for a cook.

Perhaps one of the most famous rip-offs when people knew who Steven Seagal was. Again an enjoyable romp, nowt too special but fun… just avoid the terrible sequel.

No Contest – (A.K.A Die Hard At A Beauty Pageant)

No Contest

Yeah you read that right. Just think of all the locales already mentioned and where one could set a Die Hard rip-off… would you think a beauty contest would work? This one is from 1995 and stars very soft porn actress Shannon Tweed… she’s married to Gene Simmons you know?

Yeah this is as bad as it sounds. Tweed plays kick-boxer/actress Sharon Bell who while at A Miss Galaxy beauty pageant, fends off a gang who take hostages. The gang demand diamonds as a ransom or they’ll… zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz… Sorry dozed off for a while there. Oh errrrr, Robert (“Agent Johnson, no the other one”) Davi from Die Hard is in it.

This is fucking atrocious, I mean – this is Die Hard 4 & 5 levels of bad. Even worse, they made a sequel… don’t look it up.

Icebreaker – (A.K.A Die Hard At A Ski Resort)

Icebreaker.png

It’s time to hit the piste as Sean Astin plays Matt Foster – the cough “hero”. Released in 2000 a year before people would finally recognise Sean Austin as a Hobbit.

So everything is going great at the Killington ski resort. Foster, one of the resort’s Ski Patrol is seen as a bum by his soon to be father-in-law. Enter terrorist Carl Greig who takes control of the ski resort/. The plot has something to do with radio active material stolen from Russia or something. I really lost interest in this one, can’t really remember the plot if I’m honest. But whatever happened in the plot, Foster gets the chance to impress his fiancé’s father when he saves the day.

Dull film with a bland plot. Still, Bruce Campbell plays the main bad guy and that’s the only good thing about the film.

Speed – (A.K.A Die Hard On A Bus)

Speed

Very few of these Die Hard rip-offs are any good. Some of them are terrible, most of them are okay and a handful of them are fantastic. Speed is definitely one of the greats. Released in 1994 when the Die Hard rip-off still felt fresh and starring John Wick, sorry Keanu Reeves.

Reeves plays Jack Traven a young SWAT officer who finds himself trapped on a bus armed with a bomb after he thwarted a previous attempt to extort money via the use of a bomb by madman Howard Payne. When the bus hits 50 MPH, the bomb is armed and if it drops below 50, it blows up killing all on board. Pop quiz, hotshot. What do you do? Traven teams up with plucky bus driver, Annie to save the hostages on board the bus as well as themselves.

The chemistry between Keanu Reeves’ Jack Traven and Sandra Bullock as Annie is wonderful. The action is exiting and well directed. Plus you have legendary Dennis Hopper playing the mad bomber. When it comes to Die Hard rip-off, they don’t get better than this… the sequel though?

Command Performance – (A.K.A Die Hard At A Live Gig)

Command Performace

From 2009 comes this written by, directed by and starring Dolph Lundgren flick. The film is said to be (very loosely) based on a true story where Madonna performed a special live gig for Vladimir Putin… only with a large sprinkling of fantasy.

So the Russian President asks pop sensation Venus (Madonna/Venus, get it?) to perform an exclusive gig as his daughters are big fans. Lundgren plays Joe, an ex-biker, turned drummer who has to save the day when terrorists turn up at the concert and take the President, along with others as hostages. Joe teams up with young Russian agent Mikhail Kapista to kill the bad guys and save the hostages.

Dolph Lundgren is a drummer in real life and I’m pretty sure the only reason this film exists is so Lundgren can show people he can really drum… and do it well too. Just a shame the film isn’t as good as his drumming. This is one of those very mundane Die Hard rip-offs. It’s not terrible, its far from great – it just kind of is.


 

Well there you have it, a few good, and more than a few bad Die Hard rip-offs. Trust me, there’s a lot more out there – I’ve only just touched on a handful of the more famous ones as well as highlight some of the not so famous ones… Die Hard at a beauty pageant, seriously?

Die Hard Art Feet

More stunning fan-art from Chris Weston at Xombiedirge.com

Next up in my celebration of 30 years of Die Hard, I’m tackling the big one, a subject I’ve avoided for a long time. It’s December so it just seems right that I offer my own opinion on that yearly debate and eternal question that is, is Die Hard a Christmas movie?

But The Joker Doesn’t Have An Origin!

I actually meant to write this one a few weeks ago… but the Red Dead Redemption II release kind of took over my blog for a while and all I’d been doing was RDR related articles. Still, semi-normal service has now resumed.

So anyway, there’s a new film telling the origin story of The Joker being filmed right now called Joker as shown in that above early/test footage. Set to be released next year and starring Joaquin Phoenix as the titular Clown Prince of Crime. the film will be a stand alone picture not connected to the existing D.C. movie universe (thankfully). Yet some people are getting all annoyed with the fact that in the comics, The Joker has never had a definitive origin so a film version should not exist. Even the man himself either does not know or refuses to remember the person he was before he became Batman’s arch-nemesis. I suppose this article could be thrown in with my Comic Book Fans Have Short Memories article from a while back. I mean, It’s not as if Joker hasn’t already had an origin story on film is it?

How about Batman: Mask of the Phantasm? It was an animated film from 1993, a continuation of the very awesome animated T.V. show. This film shows one possible origin of The Joker. the fact the movie is also pretty damn amazing and a huge fan favourite helps… oh and it was nominated for an Annie (animation equivalent to the Oscars), sadly it lost out to The Lion King – but still goes to show just how respected the film really was and still is. People love this flick and it has an origin for The Joker.

Batman Mask of the Phantasm Joker.jpg

2016’s The Killing Joke also offered a possible origin for The Joker. Based on the graphic novel of the same name. When a struggling stand up comedian finds it hard to support his pregnant wife, he turns to crime and that lays down the basis for becoming The Joker. Oh and let’s not forget this…

Batman 89.jpg

Still my favourite Batman movie and yes, The Joker is given an origin. Tim Burton’s Batman from 1989 was a pretty bold movie in that regard as (correct me if I’m wrong)  The Joker had never been given an origin before, at least not on screen. I really loved the origin here too as it was Batman who created The Joker… but it was The Joker who created Batman first. They are two sides of the same coin.

Batman 89 Joker

Besides, we don’t really know all the details for this new Joker film as the plot is being kept tip-top secret. All we know is that Joaquin Phoenix is playing Arthur Fleck before becoming The Joker. But here are a couple of ideas off the top of my head of how the film could handle the origin story.

He’s lying. The film being made is just a lie told by The Joker. Kind of how Heath Ledger’s Joker from The Dark Knight told a different story about how he got those scars. This film really could be The Joker just telling a fable of who he once was.

Or the film could be an anthology telling more than one origin story within one film. Look at the comics, they have a similar idea as The Joker has had multiple origin stories and none of them are definitive, they are just possibilities. Maybe that’s the plan to tell different origin stories in one film or even make multiple Joker films all telling a different origin and this is just the first one?

Joker 2019.jpg

Either way, point is. I don’t understand why some people are against this new Joker movie telling his origin… or at least one of his origins. It has been done before in the comics and movies several times over and this is just another version. This is a flick I’m looking forward to… so far at least. I have been stung by D.C. films in recent years so I’m very concerned about whether that can deliver a worthy movie or not. But at this early stage, I really like Joaquin Phoenix and think he could be a perfect bit of casting. It’s all very hush, hush right now with no one really knowing what the film will be about other then it being an origin story. The early test footage shows very little but I’m sure we will see more of the flick over the next few weeks and months.

Anyway, calm down folks. All these fans getting upset because its an origin and The Joker doesn’t have one. It’s been done before, pretty damn well too. This could be the start of something great… or it could be another D.C. movie disaster.

 

40 Years Of Halloween: Part II

Today is Halloween and I’m back with the second part to my Halloween retrospective. After several years of terrible, terrible sequels, will things get any better?

Halloween H20: 20 Years Later

Halloween H20 20 Years Later

So here we are celebrating the 40th anniversary of the original Halloween film with a film that was released to celebrate the 20th anniversary. (Ohh, we’re half way there
Oh-oh, livin’ on a prayer!) Released in 1998 and directed by Steve Miner (known for his work on the Friday the 13th franchise). This ones sees the return of Laurie Strode who was killed off in Halloween 4: The Return of Michael Myers and the first film in the continual story of Michael Myers without Dr. Loomis.

So the film begins with Marion Chambers (Nancy Stephens) who was the assistant of Dr. Loomis from Halloween and Halloween II. She finds her home has been broken into. Marion discovers the file on Laurie Strode (Jamie Lee Curtis) has gone. The missing file held info on the presumed dead Laurie and her new identity of Keri Tate. Michael soon turns up, kills Marion and escapes with the file.

Now living in California Laurie Strode/Keri Tate is the headmistress of Hillcrest Academy, a private boarding school. She has moved on with her life after faking her death via a car accident to put her history behind her. Still haunted by the events of 1978, Laurie/Keri finds it hard to adjust to her new life fearing her brother Michael could return… and he does. Most of the students and teachers of Hillcrest Academy have gone on an overnight field trip to Yosemite National Park leaving only a skeleton staff at the school. However, a few of the students stayed on at the school to have a secret Halloween party in the school’s basement.

Of course the inevitable happens as Michael Myers arrives at the school to hunt down his sister… again. Michael sets about thinning out the student population and eventually comes face to face with his sister for the first time in twenty years. Laurie soon finds herself fighting for her life once more as well as trying to protect her teenage son.

My View

So this one kind of confuses me a little. Its said to be a sequel that ignores anything from Halloween 4: The Return of Michael Myers to Halloween: The Curse of Michael Myers and is a direct sequel to Halloween II – which is fine, I have no problem with them doing that. There is no mention of Laurie’s daughter, Jamie from the previous three films which of course there shouldn’t be if the events of the other films didn’t happen in this timeline… but they do point out that the car crash that supposedly killed Laurie in Halloween 4 was faked. So there is continuity with the previous films. But if the previous films never happened, then why make that connection?

Well turns out that there was a direct connection. The original script was written with a scene where a student in one of Laurie/Keri’s classes does a report on the “Haddonfield Murders” and even goes into detail about Jamie Lloyd, Laurie’s daughter from the previous films. The report also details how Laurie “died” in a car accident and how Michael Myers eventually tracked down his niece and killed her. At this point, a clearly shocked Laurie/Keri leaves the classroom and throws up. Its also worth noting that John Carpenter was even set to return as director as Jamie Lee Curtis wanted to reunite, but when he asked for a $10 million directors fee (after believing he was cheated out of royalties), he walked when a deal could not be made.

Halloween H20 20 Years Later Laurie

Anyway, this was released during the resurgence of the slasher film in the 90s thanks to Wes Craven’s Scream (1996). The difference is though that Scream was self-aware, it was making fun of the genre while also paying respects to it. Halloween H20: 20 Years Later just is not that clever and comes across as another bog-standard slasher flick. Don’t get me wrong, its not a bad film at all and definitely one of the better sequels in the franchise but its also nothing special.

Its great to see Jamie Lee Curtis back in the role that made her famous two decades previously and you know what? I’ll even go so far as to say the story idea is a good one too, but overall the film just needed “something”. The previously mentioned Scream had that “something”, that hook to pull you in. Halloween H20: 20 Years Later is just very one note, very mundane and lacks punch. Its predictable, its a bit bland and really offers nothing new. Michael Myers turns up and kills teenagers… that’s about it. Its all very 90s with predictable jump scare after predictable jump scare. The last 10 minutes or so is pretty good though.

As I said, Jamie Lee Curtis is brilliant well worth watching. Plus she has the best scene in the film and one for a horror nerd such as myself to enjoy that is full of trivia. Jamie shares some screen time with her real-life mother Janet Leigh. Of course Janet famously played Marion Crane in Psycho. The character Janet is playing this film is called Norma, which was the name of Norman Bates mother from Psycho, plus the car Janet has in the scene is the exact same car she had in Psycho and even has the same license plate. Then (if you listen carefully) you’ll hear a few bars of the Psycho music play in the background.

“He sat in a sanitarium for 15 years, waiting for me. Then… one rainy night, he decides to go… Trick or Treating”

– Laurie Strode

Halloween: Resurrection

Halloween Resurrection Title

Released in 2002 from director, Rick Rosenthal who also directed Halloween II. This one picks up a few years after the previous film with Laurie Strode (Jamie Lee Curtis) now a patient at Grace Andersen Sanitarium after accidentally killing paramedic at the end of the previous film whom she believed was her killer brother, Michael Myers.

Acting in a catatonic state, Laurie is secretly readying herself for the return of Micheal. On Halloween night 2001, Michael breaches the security at the sanitarium and gets to Laurie. She lures him into a trap on the roof and is moments away from killing her brother (again) when he gets the better of her. Michael stabs Laurie and drops her off the roof – finally completing his mission of over twenty years. Yes, Laurie Strode is now dead.

The next year and some university students win a contest to appear on an internet reality show called Dangertainment and is set to be filmed in Michael Myers’ childhood home. The show is directed by directed by Freddie Harris (Busta Rhymes). Of course Michael turns up and systematically kills the students while everything is being broadcast on the internet.

My View

This is bad, this is Halloween 46 level of bad. So lets get the only good thing about the film out of the way first. Jamie Lee Curtis back as Laurie Strode for the final time (in this continuity anyway). Yeah she’s good. Its only a small cameo role in the opening but at least it is the opening so once she’s gone you can switch the film off and watch something else instead. Jamie only agreed to do this film as long as they finally killed Laurie off as she didn’t want to appear in any more Halloween film after this… yeah, about that…

Even then, her death is not 100% definite as while she is stabbed and dropped of a roof, you don’t actually see her die on screen. She just disappears into a tree during the fall. The writing of this film is god awful and you can tell that from the terrible way they retcon the ending of the last film to suit this one. It turns out that Laurie didn’t kill Micheal at all and he swapped places with a random paramedic. You know you’re in for a bad time with this when the continuity is so damn bad that the recap at the start of this shows Laurie and Michael (not really him) drive off in an ambulance that looks nothing like the one from the end of Halloween H20: 20 Years Later, its not even close. Let this lack of detail be a warning for just how lazy and incompetent the rest of the film will be.

Halloween Resurrection Michael Myers

Stupid characters doing stupid things being killed by a stupid killer. The film is stupid. I mean, there a scene were one of the students throws black pepper in Micheal’s eyes to stop him… and it works too. This is the same Micheal Myers who has been shot multiple times, blown up, stabbed in the eyes and still kept going – but black pepper is his weakness? Halloween H20: 20 Years Later was hardly a great film, it was watchable with some okay moments and a pretty good ending. This film does away with all of that, the retconing of the good ending of the previous film is an insult and the finale to this with Busta Rhymes getting into a fistfight with Micheal Myers while saying “mother fucka” a lot is embarrassing.

There was an idea to make a sequel to this with Laurie Strode’s son from Halloween H20: 20 Years Later seeking out Micheal for revenge over killing his mother. But as this film flopped hard, the producers quickly abandoned that idea and decided to go a different route…

“You’ve heard of the tunnel. The one we all go through sooner or later. At the end, there’s a door. And waiting for you on the other side of that door is either Heaven or Hell. This that door.”

– Laurie Strode

Halloween

Halloween 2007

So the last film all but killed the franchise off, plans to make more sequels were scrapped in favor of a remake. Enter director Rob Zombie to get this film released in 2007. The baisc plot is the same as the original flick, but this one mixes in a little Halloween II as well. Young Michael Myers kills his older sister Judith and is sent to Smith’s Grove Sanitarium where he becomes a patient of Dr. Loomis (Malcolm McDowell).

Fifteen year later, Micheal escapes the sanitarium and makes is way back to his old home in Haddonfield to continue his killing spree. Dr. Loomis teams up with  Sheriff Brackett (Brad Dourif) to try to track Micheal down. Along the way, Loomis learns that Laurie Strode (Scout Taylor-Compton) is really the sister of Micheal and soon works out that she will be is next victim.

My View

I said in the first part about the original film that I’m not a huge fan. I like the film, I think its damn good… but I just don’t love it. So get ready with the pitchforks Halloween fans because I think this remake is a better film than the original. Yeah I said it. Not that the film doesn’t have its problems, it does. Some of the dialogue is a joke with every other word being “fuck”, a lot of the redneck characters grate at times and at a little under two hours it can be a long film for what it is. But that said, there’s a hell of a lot of great stuff in the film too.

You’ve got amazing actors such as Malcolm McDowell who is the perfect replacement for Donald Pleasence as Dr. Loomis. Honestly, he’s brilliant in the role. Then you have Brad Dourif, Dee Wallace, William Forsythe and Ken Foree. There is a great cast here. I  love how this is really a film of two parts. The first part telling the history and backstory of the young Michael Myers (Daeg Faerch) and just why he turns put the way he does. Then the second half is pretty much where the remake kicks off proper with grown up Michael killing teenagers.

Halloween 2007Michael

The film can be tense at times with some genuine scares, something not seen in a Halloween film since Halloween III: Season of the Witch back in 1982. Where as the original was mostly bloodless, this one turns up the gore factor to eleven… but its a Rob Zombie film so what where you expecting? The picture is clearly made by someone who loves and respects the original but still wanting to do their own thing with it. Its a good film, its a good remake and for me, its better than the original as this version has a story that extends to more then just killer killing teenagers.

“Inside every one us, there exists a dark side. Most people rise above it, but some are consumed by it. Until there is nothing left, but pure evil.”

– Dr. Loomis

Halloween II

Halloween II 2009 Title

Rob Zombie’s Halloween remake was panned by critics, yet it still pulled in an impressive $80 million worldwide on a $15 million budget. Success meant sequel and Rob Zombie returned to continue his vision in 2009. Pretty much all the cast from the first film returned and this one picks up directly where the last film left off. After killing Micheal Myers, a shocked Laurie Strode (Scout Taylor-Compton) is found covered and blood wandering around the streets by Sheriff Brackett (Brad Dourif) and she is taken to hospital. Michael’s body is put in the back of an ambulance and taken to the hospital, only he’s not really dead. He wakes up as the ambulance crashes into a cow.

The film jumps ahead two years and Laurie is now living with Sheriff Brackett and his family. Laurie begins to have nightmares of Michael and the events of the first film. Meanwhile Dr. Loomis (Malcolm McDowell) writes a book based on the events and his experiences of the previous film. Micheal Myers has been in hiding and having visions of his dead mother and his younger self who tell him to bring Laurie home. So he heads back to Haddonfield.

My View

I really enjoyed the first film (and I mean Rob Zombie’s first Halloween film), but this? What a fucking mess. Its trying to be clever, psychological, cerebral and it fails at all three. I’m pretty sure the only reason the idea of this film came about was because Michael’s mom is played by Rob Zombie’s wife, Sheri Moon Zombie. As he always puts her in his movies and as she died in the first one, I’m sure the thought process was ‘Need to get the missus in the film, but she died in the first one… make her a ghost. Problem solved’. Then the film was written around the idea of Michael’s mom’s ghost.

Honestly, the whole film makes little sense. The plot is nonsensical, the story is pathetic. Its just all over the place with no clear direction. How did Rob Zombie mess this up so badly when he nailed it first time around? Its a real shame as the film gets off to a great start, the opening and scenes in the hospital are really well done. Its just a shame it all goes very wrong very quickly after that.

Halloween II 2009 Michael

The good bits? Obviously the performances from both Malcolm McDowell and Brad Dourif and that’s about it really. Oh the soundtrack is pretty great too. Other than that, best to avoid this one. I didn’t like it when I first saw it back then, I like it even less after re-watching it for this retrospective. I’m not damning the film for doing something different, I like different, that’s why Halloween III: Season of the Witch is my favourite in the franchise, because its different. But this, this is just pretentiously silly and stupid.

For almost a decade, that was it, no more Halloween. Until…

“Hey, world! Guess what. I’m Michael Myers’ sister! I’m so fucked!”

– Laurie Strode

Halloween

Halloween 2018

Okay so this is the third film in the franchise to be simply called Halloween. The 1978 original, the 2007 remake and now this. Directed by David Gordon Green and sees the return of Jamie Lee Curtis as Laurie Strode. Set forty years after the original and ignores every film in the franchise except the original flick. So really this is Halloween II but a different Halloween II to the 1981 sequel and 2009 Halloween II sequel of the remake. Phew.

So Michael Myers has been locked away in the Smith’s Grove Sanitarium since he was stopped at the end of the first film and captured. Dr. Loomis dies years ago and so Dr. Ranbir Sartain (Haluk Bilginer) has taken over as Michael’s doctor. Two true-crime podcasters turn up at the sanitarium to interview Michael armed with his original mask form forty years before. They fail to get anything out if him despite mentioning the very person who stood up to him and survived his killing spree four decades ago, Laurie Strode.

Still desperate to get a story, the podcasters go to interview Laurie herself. This is when we learn of her PTSD, failed marriages and that she has a daughter and granddaughter. The family is strained and the relationship between mother, daughter and granddaughter broke down several years earlier. Laurie is given the chance to speak to Michael before he is transferred to a maximum security prison, which Laurie declines.

Dr. Sartain accompanies Michael Myers as he is transferred along with several other prisoners. Only for the bus carrying the inmates to crash, Michael escapes, tracks down those annoying podcasters, kills them and gets his mask back before heading back to Haddonfield and to Laurie. Meanwhile, Laurie learns about the crash and finds herself fighting for not only her own life but also those of her daughter and granddaughter. But Laurie hasn’t been sitting quietly knitting for the last forty years, she’s been preparing for Michael’s return.

My View

Okay so to be completely honest, I’ve not yet seen the new film. Since becoming a father last year, my cinema visits have been cut back to pretty much none. I managed to go see Bohemian Rhapsody a few days ago and that was my first time in a cinema since I watched Logan in March 2017 over a year earlier. So as I’ve not seen the film, I can’t really offer a view of it can I? I was hoping to squeeze in a viewing before doing this retrospective but it didn’t work out.

Still, while managing to avoid spoilers, I have read a few reviews and the feedback has been largely positive. The film sounds pretty damn good and Jamie Lee Curtis has been getting a lot of positive praise too. I’ll most probably have to wait until the home release before I do get to watch Halloween. At least they got John Carpenter to return for this one. Even if only as composer, executive producer, and creative consultant. He’s been directly involved in the franchise for the first time since 1982. I’m looking forward to this one if/when I eventually get to see it.

“Michael Myers killed 5 people. And he’s a human being, we need to understand. I’m twice divorced, and I’m a basket case.”

– Laurie Strode


 

Well there you have it, the entire Halloween franchise. forty years of films that are mostly terrible. I have a great deal of respect for the original even if I’m not its biggest fan. I fucking love Halloween III: Season of the Witch and think Rob Zombie’s remake was fantastic… but that’s about it for the whole series. A total of eleven films and only three that I think are truly worth watching. The new film does look and sound great, but as I’ve not yet seen it, I can’t really pass judgement – that will have to wait for later.

As an overall franchise, Halloween has many more disappointments than worthy pictures. Pretty much all horror franchises get tiresome fairly quickly with bad sequel after bad sequel and in that respect, Halloween is not one of the worst offenders. Even the absolute worst of the films still have some redeeming quality be it Donald Pleasence as Dr. Loomis, Jamie Lee Curtis returning several times or even the opening 10-15 minutes of the god-awful Rob Zombie’s Halloween II. Its a decent franchise, I just wished they had gone the anthology idea route after Halloween III: Season of the Witch as we could have had a great variety of Halloween based flicks for the last few decades instead of the same old crap of Michael Myers killing teenagers.

 

HAPPY HALLOWEEN!

40 Years Of Halloween: Part I

Yup, its that time of year again. Its getting colder, the nights are drawing in, the clocks have gone back,the leaves are turning golden brown and falling from the trees and October is coming to an end. Halloween is just around the corner once more, so its time to watch some scary flicks. But what to write about this year? Well, it has been 40 years this year since one of the most influential horror films ever was released and right here for my 2018 Halloween celebrations, I’m going to take a look at the film that changed horror cinema forever…

The Bees

Directed by Alfredo Zacarías in 1978, starring John Saxon and John Carradine. The Bees was a Mexican horror film about killer South American bees that have been imported to the U.S. where they wreak havoc. Yeah I don’t know why I’m even attempting to fool you either. You’ve read the title, you’ve seen the main image of the iconic Michael Myers. You know what this is all about. Halloween.

40 years ago this year and John Carpenter unleashed his now immortal and influential slasher picture, Halloween. It may not have been the first slasher horror film, but its the one that the sub-genre is held up to and the template many, many films would follow for four decades. Halloween changed cinema forever and its importance can not be overstated. Right here I’m going to take a look at every film in the franchise from the original up to the latest in the series. I’ll do a quick synopsis of each film and then offer my own views and opinions for each one. To paraphrase Dr. Loomis…

“I’ve been writing this article for fifteen days, sitting in a room, staring at my laptop, not seeing the laptop, looking past the laptop, looking at this night. Inhumanly patient, waiting for some secret, silent alarm to trigger me off. Death has come to this little blog. Now, you can either ignore it, or you can help me by reading and sharing it.”

Halloween

Halloween Title

Released in 1978 (happy 40th Halloween) from legendary writer/director John Carpenter. Halloween tells the story of Michael Myers. Beginning in 1963 when Myers was only six years old, dressed as a clown for Halloween. Michael grabs a kitchen knife and stabs his older sister, Judith to death. No rhyme or reason, he just murders his own sister with no remorse or explanation. Michael is then institutionalised in the Warren County’s Smith’s Grove Sanitarium.

Fifteen years pass and on the 30th of October, 1978. The now adult Michael Myers escapes the sanitarium, returns to his home town of Haddonfield to continue building his body count. Enter the shy and retiring Laurie Strode (Jamie Lee Curtis) and her school friends who are preparing to celebrate Halloween.

Meanwhile, Dr. Loomis (Donald Pleasence) who is Michael’s psychiatrist, tries to track the deranged murderer down before he can kill again. Loomis attempts to get help from the local police, but they find his story a little unbelievable… until the bodies begin to show up. Laurie babysits one of his neighbours kids watching scary movies, carving pumpkins and the like. Michael sets about killing her friends one by one until Laurie is the only one left. All leading to a classic showdown between unstoppable killer and scared babysitter.

My View

Halloween is an undisputed classic and I’ll happily argue against anyone that states other wise. John Carpenter is a genius for not just his minimalist writing, masterful direction but also THAT music score. Yup, the music of Halloween is just as much of a character as Michael Myers himself.

I respect Halloween, I fucking adore John Carpenter as an artist. He’s one of my favourite writer/directors ever. And yet, I’m not a huge fan of the film. Yeah this all sounds a little contradictory right now eh? Yes I think the film is a classic, yes I have the up most respect for it and yes I like the film… but I just don’t love it. Of the big three hitters of the classic slasher film genre, those three being Halloween, Friday the 13th and A Nightmare on Elm Street, of those iconic trilogy of horror films – Halloween is my least favourite. Its just a tad boring. I don’t mind a slow paced film and this is slow paced. What John Carpenter does with the time in the film is commendable. There are times when its tense and suspenseful sure and the atmosphere created is still some of the best in any horror film even today. But overall, I feel the film unnecessarily drags on as if there is just not enough story for a full feature film. Perhaps this would have been better as a shorter 40-50 minute piece over a feature?

Halloween Laurie.jpg

Yeah I know what I’m doing here. I’m saying that the all time classic Halloween is not all that classic. But hey, that’s how I feel. When it comes to John Carpenter films, I’d just rather watch They Live, Escape From New York, The ThingBig Trouble in Little China and even the massively overlooked In the Mouth of Madness. Quite honestly, Halloween would struggle to make it into my list of truly great Carpenter classics. And as I previously said, I’d even choose other horror films over this one too.

Again, I respect Halloween, it is a classic but its just not an all time classic for me and I feel that John Carpenter made several other films that are far superior. Still with all that said, I’m more than happy to sit down and watch Halloween. I just did to do this whole retrospective and I have a lot more films to get through.

“You’ve got to believe me, Officer, he is coming to Haddonfield…Because I know him! I’m his doctor! You must be ready for him…If you don’t, it’s your funeral.”

– Dr. Loomis

Halloween II

Halloween II

This 1981 sequel saw the return of a lot of the cast and crew from the first film, sadly no John Carpenter in the director’s chair. Taking on the main role this time around is Rick Rosenthal. Though Carpenter did come up with the story and pen the screenplay, plus he was a producer on the film too. Picking up directly after the events of the first flick, Michael Myers is alive and well while Laurie Strode is taken to Haddonfield Memorial Hospital after her ordeal at the end of the previous film.

Dr. Loomis continues his search for Michael in Haddonfield until the governor orders Loomis to go back to the Smith’s Grove Sanitarium. While on route back to the sanitarium, Loomis learns that Laurie Strode is the younger sister of Michael Myers and realises that Michael is heading to the hospital where Laurie is to kill her.

At the hospital, Michael has already begun pilling up the bodies in his search for his sister. Loomis turns up just in time to save Laurie as everything ends with a bang finally putting an end to Michael’s murderous ways.

My View

John Carpenter himself has said that he didn’t want to make any sequel to the film as this interview with Deadline points out.

I didn’t think there was any more story, and I didn’t want to do it again. All of my ideas were for the first Halloween, there shouldn’t have been any more! However, I couldn’t stop them from making sequels. So my agents said, ‘Why don’t you become an executive producer and you can share the revenue?’ But I had to write the second movie, and every night I sat there and wrote with a six pack of beer trying to get through this thing. And I didn’t do a very good job, but that was it. I couldn’t do any more.

– John Carpenter

Carpenter has never made any secret about the fact that he really didn’t want to make this movie, that’s why he refused to return as director. But seeing as the studio were going to make the film with or without him, he thought he may as well write it and earn some cash regardless. The film is a bit of a mess and clearly hastily thrown together just to cash in on the massive success of the first film. It lacks the spark Carpenter brought to the table with the first film. Its not as atmospheric, not as scary, not as moody. Watch the two films back to back (as I just have) and you can really see a decline in the quality of direction. Where as the first film used atmosphere and suspense to great effect, this sequel negates all of that for a higher body count and more gory deaths. I don’t mean to rag on Rick Rosenthal but he’s clearly no John Carpenter. Oh and the wig they put on Jamie Lee Curtis (she cut her hair for another role) is terrible…

Halloween II Laurie

The plot is stupid, the characters are dull and the dialogue is terrible. Carpenter has admitted that he was drunk while writing this film and it shows too. Yet despite all of the troubles behind the scenes and the problems on screen, overall this is not a terrible film. Yeah its hokey, yeah its cheesy but for a sequel to a slasher film, its still watchable. Its nowhere near as good as the first film, not even close but its not a terrible sequel either. We’ll get plenty of those later.

I kind of like Halloween II. Its a stupid flick yeah, but its a good stupid flick.

“He was my patient for fifteen years. He became an obsession with me until I realized that there was nothing within him, neither conscious nor reason that was… even remotely human.”

– Dr. Loomis

Halloween III: Season of the Witch

Halloween III Title

So this is a major departure over the previous two films. Directed by Tommy Lee Wallace and released in 1982. Where as the first two films followed the story of Michael Myers, this sequel has nothing to do with him at all. Its a whole new story about Dr. Dan Challis (Tom Atkins) who turns detective when a patient is murdered on his ward while clutching a strange Halloween mask while ranting about people dying when he was admitted to the hospital.

The daughter of the victim, Ellie Grimbridge (Stacey Nelkin) joins Dan Challis in his investigation which leads them to a small town called Santa Mira where the Halloween mask originally came from. The masks are made by Silver Shamrock Novelties, a toy manufacturing company headed up by Conal Cochran (Dan O’Herlihy).

As Dan and Ellie dig deeper into their investigation, they soon learn that Silver Shamrock and Conal Cochran may not be as sweet and innocent as they first appear to be and a strange plot involving Stonehenge and the killing of children emerges.

My View

Okay so maybe a little backstory first. Halloween II was meant to be the end of Michael Myers, they killed him off, they killed him off good. But there was a problem, that problem was the fact that the Halloween name was a major draw to the box office, it made money and lots of it too. The studio wanted more Halloween films but they didn’t have Michael Myers anymore cos he dead. John Carpenter was approached and asked if he would return to the franchise, he declined so the studio offered him a fuck load of money. Carpenter agreed to come back as a producer but only if the film is not a direct sequel to the previous one. So the the idea came about to turn the Halloween films into an anthology thing with a new film every year, only the stories would be separate and that each subsequent film from this point on would be a new story and new characters. Halloween III: Season of the Witch was set to be the start of a whole new franchise concept… only that’s not how it all worked out.

Anyway of all the films that bear the Halloween name, this is my all time favourite. Yeah I just said that Halloween III: Season of the Witch is my favourite of the whole franchise. The film was slated when it was originally released and the fans hated it. No Michael Myers, no ticket sales and the film bombed. Due to the poor critical response and commercial failure the film ended up being, the idea to continue the whole anthology idea was scrapped and Michael Myers would be brought back for all future Halloween film form this point onward.

Halloween III Masks

As I said, I love this one and the reasons I do love it is for all the reasons most people hate it. Its not about Michael Myers and I applaud the film for that as I was bored of him anyway. The plot is a more than a little stupid if you stop and think about it… so don’t think about it. Its a stupid film, a very stupid film but its also thoroughly entertaining. I never felt bored watching this one as I have with the previous two in palaces. Its just a damn shame the general public only wanted more of the same and more Michael Myers as I’d loved to have seen what this franchise could have become if it did turn into an anthology series.

There are some genuinely terrifying scenes in this one coupled with some stunning effects work. I mean, the scene with that woman at the motel messing around with the microchip found in the badge on the mask, or the bit where the kid wears the mask and Conal Cochran reveals his nefarious (and asinine) plan –  pretty shocking stuff. Dan O’Herlihy as the main antagonist is brilliant, he’s charming but slimy, warm but twisted all at the same time. Tom Atkins playing the lead role hold the film together nicely and he has an awesome moustache too. The film has an eerie and unnerving feel about it especially when we get to Santa Mira and the Silver Shamrock factory. As I said, the plot is silly, but its a good silly and a bloody entertaining film from start to finish.

Halloween III TV Mask

There’s also an interesting social commentary in regards to consumerism running through the film, but people don’t want subtle and clever satire, they just want to see Michael Myers slowly walking after stupid teenagers cos that’s much more interesting…

Its a damn shame this picture flopped as it did because the idea of expanding the franchise into an anthology series was great. Each year a new Halloween film with a new story? The idea was limitless, but people just wanted to see the same thing over and over instead. People are stupid. Halloween III: Season of the Witch is dark, moody, atmospheric and had some great scares in it too. Just judge it on the film it is and not the film Michael Myers fans wanted it to be. Oh and also be on the look out for a few Halloween cameos too inducing, Nancy Loomis who played Annie, Laurie’s friend in the first film, Jamie Lee Curtis has a voice cameo and yes even Michael Myers himself appears.

“Halloween… the festival of Samhain! The last great one took place three thousand years ago, when the hills ran red with the blood of animals and children.”

– Conal Cochran

Halloween 4: The Return of Michael Myers

Halloween 4 The Return of Michael Myers Title

Directed by Dwight H. Little in 1988. This one sees the return of Michael Myers (now there’s a title) after the box office bomb that was the previous flick. So Michael has been in a coma for a decade (which makes no sense) following the events of Halloween II. As he is being taken to his old haunt of Smith’s Grove Sanitarium, he wakes up. The now conscious Michael overhears that his sister, Laurie was killed in a car accident but had a daughter, Jamie Lloyd (Danielle Harris). Michael Myers now has a new target and heads back to Haddonfield in search of his niece.

When Dr. Loomis, who also survived the explosion from Halloween II (also doesn’t make sense) learns Michael has woken and gone to Haddonfield, he quickly follows. Jamie is living with foster family. The elder daughter of the family is left to babysit Jamie and that is when Michael turns up with Dr. Loomis not far behind him.

My View

You know, just writing that synopsis up there just made me realise how pointless do so it is from this point on. See, pretty much all the Halloween films from now forward all follow the same basic plot. Everyone thinks Michael Myers is dead, turns out he’s not. Michael goes out looking for victims and Dr. Loomis follows. There you go, that’s pretty much all the films covered from this point onward.

This is not a good film and it still annoys me they dropped the anthology idea for this crap. Its just bland, predictable and lifeless. The only real saving grace is Donald Pleasence returning as Dr. Loomis. In fact he’s the only reason to watch any of the films in the franchise he was in from this point. Pleasence is just too damn good for a film this poor. They even almost tempted John Carpenter to return with this film. He was originally on board to write and direct. In fact Carpenter wrote a treatment to be turned into a script. His idea centered around a more psychological concept based on the idea of what effects the events of the first two films had on the residents of Haddonfield. It sounded pretty interesting and would’ve been a more cerebral flick. But the idea was rejected in favour of a standard slasher movie and so John Carpenter sold the rights to the franchise and walked from the project. This is the first film in the franchise that didn’t involve Carpenter in some way after serving as writer, director and producer from the first film to the third and it shows. You know things are bad when they mess up the iconic mask…

Halloween 4 The Return of Michael Myers Michael Mask

Halloween 4: The Return of Michael Myers is a lazy and poor imitation of the first film and follows many of the exact same beats. Michael escapes and steals a mechanic’s overalls, Dr. Loomis spends a lot of time with the sheriff, the daughter of the sheriff is one of Michael’s victims, Michael kills and eats a dog, there’s a bullying subplot, etc. Honestly, this is a remake of the original with many of the same scenes repeated beat for beat. It even copies some of the dialogue directly form the original film too. And they dropped John Carpenter’s original more clever idea for this?

I read this film took eleven days to write and seeing as its a blatant rip-off of the first one, that seems like about ten days too many. Just watch the first film, its like this one only far, far better and the ending is not as stupid either.

“We’re not talking about any ordinary prisoner, Hoffman! We are talking about evil on two legs.”

– Dr. Loomis

Halloween 5: The Revenge of Michael Myers

Halloween 5 The Revenge of Michael Myers Title

Yes he’s back (again). Released in 1989 and directed by Dominique Othenin-Girard. Not only is Michael Myers back but so are Donald Pleasence and Danielle Harris reprising their respective roles from the previous film. This one picks up a year after the events of the last one. So this time, Michael falls into a coma (again) after the ending of the last film. He is found by a hermit and nursed back to health. After killing the hermit, Michael returns to Haddonfield to kill his niece Jamie (again), who has been committed to a children’s hospital.

Of course Dr. Loomis turns up (again) to try and stop Michael Myers (again). Some strange man in back keeps popping up. There’s some telepathic link crap thrown in between Michael and Jamie because everybody knows that uncles and nieces are telepathically linked right? So Jamie begins to have visions of Michael and his murders and Loomis uses this link to lure Michael to his demise… of being locked up in prison. Yes Michael Myers is arrested in the film.

My View

Well at least this works as direct sequel to the previous film and doesn’t just rip-off the original… though it also retcons a few things along the way. If I was asked to choose the worst film out of this one and Halloween 4: The Return of Michael Myers, that would be next to impossible as they’re both equally shit. Both badly written, both unoriginal, both boring. Yeah Donald Pleasence is on top form again and the only real reason to watch the film too.

Its not scary, its not tense. Its a typical 80s slasher flick with very little effort put into it. The ending is stupid, Michael Myers arrested? Yeah cos after being shot multiple times, blown up, dropped down a mine shaft not to mention all the other damage he has received over the course of the films, I’m sure a pair of handcuffs will stop him. Also, why is is allowed to keep his mask while locked away?

Halloween 5 The Revenge of Michael Myers Title Michael

It bad, its really bad. But you’d better get used to that because the age of good Halloween films is long over and things are not likely to improve soon either. Also, why is it called The Revenge of Michael Myers? What revenge, he’s the bad guy, he’s the one going around killing innocent babysitters. Is he getting revenge on Jamie because she’s done nothing wrong other than be his niece? I don’t know.

“I prayed that he would burn in Hell, but in my heart I knew that Hell would not have him.”

– Dr. Loomis

Halloween: The Curse of Michael Myers

Halloween The Curse of Michael Myers

This one took a while to come out as the last film damaged the franchise so much, it was left dormant for six years until 1995 when Michael Myers was finally brought back. Directed by Joe Chappelle, this film marks the final film appearance of Donald Pleasence before his death in 1995. The niece of Michael Myers, Jamie Lloyd (J. C. Brandy) is now grown up and gives birth to her first child. She is held captive by a strange cult known as Thorn and her child is taken away by the mysterious man in back from the previous flick who is the leader of the cult.

They do some kind of ritual to the baby before a nurse grabs it, gives it back to Jamie  and helps them escape the cult. As Jamie and baby escape, Michael turns up and kills the nurse. Jamie runs for her life only she is chased by uncle Michael. She does get away and calls a radio station to warn them that Michael Myers is back but they don’t believe her. The now retired Dr. Loomis hears Jamie’s call to the radio station and quickly heads to Haddonfield. Michael eventually tracks down Jamie and kills her, only to discover the baby is gone.

Meanwhile in Haddonfield, Tommy Doyle (Paul Rudd) who was the little boy being babysat by Laurie in the first film, finds Jamie’s baby and take it into his care can calls him Steven. Tommy meets up with Dr. Loomis and they team up to take care of Michael  once and for all while trying to save baby Steven.

My View

Okay so this is just a complete mess of a film. My synopsis my seem a little all over the place, but that is only because that film is all over the place. The story is bat-shit insane and the editing is horrendous with all these quick jump cuts and flashing images making scenes extremely hard to watch. Honestly, watching this film gave me a headache. I don’t really know what is going on. The story is nonsensical, I think Michael Myers is part of this Thorn cult and he’s the father of his won niece’s baby… or something. I have no idea what the aim or point of the Thorn cult is, they just do bad things as far as I can tell. Nor do I know why Michael is part of it, he just is.

Halloween The Curse of Michael Myers Loomis.jpg

You know, people have said that Rob Zombie ruined the Halloween franchise with his remake (I’ll get to that later). No, no he didn’t. The franchise has been ruined from Halloween 4: The Return of Michael Myers and this film is just another twist of the knife. I have problems with the last two films – they’re not very good… but at the very least they were semi-competent films. This, this picture is a car crash of terrible story, awful acting and vomit enduing editing.

Of course it goes without saying that Donald Pleasence is once more the only saving grace of the film and its a sad note that this was his final film as he died before it was released. But there is a kick in the balls to the whole Donald Pleasence thing. See he originally had a bigger role in the movie, only the studio decided to cut him out of most of it. How about that for paying respects to a recently deceased legendary actor? But I’ll get onto all of that next…

Honestly, I given the legend that is Donald Pleasence much more respect in this article by using his character’s quotes from the previous films than this film does in its entirety.

“I knew what he was, but I never knew why.”

– Dr. Loomis

Halloween: The Curse of Michael Myers: The Producer’s Cut

Halloween The Curse of Michael Myers The Producers Cut

Okay so I don’t think I really need to do a synopsis of this one as its the same film, only a different cut. Yes there are some changes between the theatrical cut and this version and I’ll cover those in my view. But by and large, the plot is pretty much the same between both films.

So lets crack on with the story of the butchering of Halloween: The Curse of Michael Myers.

My View

The story goes that this version of the film was tested for an audience and they hated it. So the film was cut, re-edited as well as having to go through some re-shoots. The final result was the complete mess that is Halloween: The Curse of Michael Myers. But do you happen to know why they audience hated this cut of the film? Because the test audience was full of 14 year olds and of course 14 year olds know all about making a good film right? So yeah, the studio fucked up the film because some spotty teenagers didn’t like it.

Well I’m more than happy to say that this cut of the film is better then the released theatrical cut, but to be honest its still got a good film – just a better one. As I said, the plot is still pretty much the same but I’ll take a look at a few of the differences here.

I guess the first difference should be the title, see the film was originally called Halloween 6: The Origin of Michael Myers as this teaser trailer shows.

The biggest differences worth noting are the fact that Jamie doesn’t die… well at least not in the same way as as in the theatrical cut. Her death comes later in this cut and you know what? I actually makes sense within the plot. There’s more detail on the whole Thorn cult and explains what they are. Then editing is much better and gone are all the jump cuts and flashing images, it now looks like a film.

The opening narration in the theatrical cut was provided by Paul Rudd’s Tommy Doyle character, even though he had not been introduced to the film yet. In this version, its Dr. Loomis covering the backstory – which make so much more sense. The overall style and atmosphere of the film is also much better and there’s actually some pretty tense scenes.

As for Donald Pleasence? He has a hell of a lot more screen time, more scenes and more dialogue that fills in backstory and even covers plot holes that exist in the theatrical cut due to his part being edited down. Then there’s the ending. The theatrical cut’s ending make no sense. Dr. Loomis says he has business to take care of and the film then cuts to Michael Myers’ mask with Loomis screaming in the background. The ending here actually wraps things up and resolves the whole Thorn cult thing too. Its still not a great ending, but it makes coherent sense at least.

Halloween The Curse of Michael Myers The Producer's Cut Loomis.jpg

The film just has better pacing despite it being longer than the other version. There’s more story, more suspense and more atmosphere. In every way, this cut is far, far superior and why the studio decided to cut the shit out of it I do not know. As I said, I can’t say that this is a good film but it most definitely is better. If you really want to watch Halloween: The Curse of Michael Myers then get hold of the producers cut. You’ll thank me for it later.

This is a fitting tribute to Donald Pleasence and shows respect to a masterful actor who dedicated seventeen years of his life playing the character of Dr. Loomis. A man who died before his final film was released and had his part massively cut in the theatrical version and was disrespected for all he had done. This film is bad, but at least you can watch Donald Pleasence acting and acting well.

“I feel great! I had surgery, plastic surgery. Skin grafts. It cost a fortune, but at least I don’t frighten people anymore.”

– Dr. Loomis

Halloween The Curse of Michael Myers The Producers Cut Michael


 

I think I’ll split this one up into two parts and seeing as the next film marks an anniversary, this seems like a good place to take a break. See you in Part II.

Bohemian Rhapsody: Is This The Real Life, Is This Just Fantasy?

So I watched the Freddie Mercury biopic Bohemian Rhapsody a couple of days back. I wrote this one not long after watching the film but didn’t publish it until now as I didn’t want to break my Red Dead Redemption II saga of articles (they’ve been going on for six weeks or so). But now that damn long awaited cowboy game is released, I can resume (almost) normal service.

So I’m a huge and long time Queen fan. I grew up with their music and when Freddie died back in 1991, the world music lost one of its greatest. There can never, nor will there ever be anyone quite like Freddie Mercury. He was so unique that the word “unique” doesn’t do him justice. He was able to do things with his voice that no one else on the planet could manage and that’s not just personal opinion from a fan, its now scientific fact. But before I get into my feelings about the film, a quick history lesson of how this film came to be.

The History

This film has had a long and troubled production with it being originally announced in 2010. Back then, Sacha Baron Cohen was signed up to play Freddie. But Baron Cohen left the project in 2013 due to “creative differences”. Partly due to the fact he felt that the producers and remaining members of Queen wanted to make a family friendly picture while Baron Cohen wanted to make a more adult look at Freddie going deeper into his sexuality and lifestyle, a more honest biopic of you will. A more recent story has come out suggesting that Baron Cohen wasn’t taking the film seriously.

Bohemian Rhapsody Movie Sacha Baron Cohen

Then in 2013 Ben Whishaw was being tipped to play Freddie while Dexter Fletcher would be in the director’s chair. Both Whishaw and Fletcher left the project by 2014 with both of them citing “creative differences” (the go to excuse for leaving a film project). In 2015 it was suggested that Sacha Baron Cohen could be back as Freddie but that was proven to be false information. For a while, the film was stuck in development hell with numerous writers, directors and actors all hitting the rumor mill over the next few months.

In 2015 the film was confirmed to be back on track and a title was revealed for the first time – Bohemian Rhapsody. All new scripts had been written with Brain May and Roger Taylor attached as consultants and producers. Then in 2016 film was suddenly a-go when Rami Malek was announced to star as Freddie Mercury. Pre-production on the film began in early 2017 and filming started on September 2017 with Bryan Singer as director. Things were going well until filming ground to a halt when Singer stopped showing up to film. Exactly why this is open to speculation, one source says Bryan Singer left the film due to an illness in his family but another suggests that Singer’s poor behaviour on set got him removed from the film. Either way, the production lost it’s director with around two or three weeks still left of filming to do. So re-enter Dexter Fletcher to finish the film who was originally attached to the project back in 2013.

Bohemian Rhapsody Movie Rami Malek.jpg

Now with the film having two directors, that caused a problem as rules state only one director can be given credit. It was announced earlier this year that despite his leaving/firing that Bryan Singer would still be credited as director as he did shoot most of the film before Dexter Fletcher stepped in to finish it up.

So then finally after eight years in film development hell, the movie was released on the 24th of October here in the U.K. while our American cousins will have to wait until the 2nd of November. And I was there opening day wearing my Freddie Mercury shirt, with my mom to see this long troubled film. But was it worth it? A quick synopsis before I offer my view…

Queen Shirt

The Film

It opens up with Freddie (Rami Malek) preening himself, trimming his moustache just before heading out on stage for the famous Live Aid gig from 1985. It then jumps back to the early 70s with a teenage Freddie working at Heathrow Airport as a baggage handler where he puts up with racial abuse for being a “pakki”. Young Freddie dreams of bigger things and while at a bar enjoying a pint, he listens to the student band on stage, a band called Smile. With Brain May (Gwilym Lee) and Roger Taylor (Ben Hardy) as the lead guitarist and drummer respectively. When the lead singer leaves the band to join Humpy Bong (a folk band founded by former Bee Gees drummer Colin Petersen) Freddie steps in to offer his vocal talent, this is when he first meets Mary Austin (Lucy Boynton).

Bohemian Rhapsody Movie Freddie And Mary

The band then hire bassist John Deacon (Joseph Mazzello) and change their name to Queen. They record their first album for EMI and perform their first live gig as Queen. Freddie and Mary grow closer and become lovers as the band also grow from student gigs to tours. Queen begin become a little tired of performing the same type of music over and over so begin to experiment and from that experimentation comes their most famous song, Bohemian Rhapsody. EMI executive Ray Foster (Mike Myers) hates the song and refuses to allow Queen to release it. So the band walk out and take the song elsewhere getting it played by Kenny Everett (Dickie Beau) on his radio show. The song is a smash hit and Queen become huge.

Bohemian Rhapsody Movie Recording.jpg

While out on tour in Rio Freddie begins to show an interest in men and when he returns home he confesses to his then girlfriend that he is bisexual. The pair split but remain very close friends. As Queen begin to rise in the world of music, Freddie’s life begins to unravel. Keeping his sexuality from the press despite continual intrusion. Freddie begins to find comfort in drink, drugs and sex with anyone who shows him even the slightest bit of interest. Cracks begin to show in the band as Freddie grows increasingly out of control and he keeps turning up late for recording sessions often drunk, high or both after a heavy night of partying. Eventually, Freddie feels stifled by Queen and decides to go it alone by signing a solo contract behind the back of the other members at the suggestion of his manager. Queen (unofficially) split and go their separate ways.

Freddie moves to Germany to work on his solo music. After a visit from Mary who gives him a few home truths, Freddie returns home after sacking his backstabbing manager and meets up with the other members of Queen to ask them to reform so they can do the Live Aid gig as a way to say goodbye properly. They agree and the film ends with an amazing recreation of (almost) the entire Queen set from Live Aid 1985 and they cement themselves into rock music history.

Bohemian Rhapsody Movie Poster Freddie.jpg

My View

I’m a huge Queen fan so obviously there is going to be a little bias in my view. The film is utterly brilliant. Now its not perfect and hardcore Queen fans (like me) will spot several flaws especially if you have seen as many Queen documentaries and interviews as I have. This is a biopic and like other biopics certain aspects are exaggerated, changed and twisted to make the film more entertaining. What I’m trying to say is that not everything in this film is 100% factual. But creative licence has to be expected with these kinds of movies, they are not documentaries, they are films. I’m not going to concentrate on the half truths in the film but will highlight a few issues.

Bohemian Rhapsody Movie Poster Freddie and Brian.jpg

First, the film is rated 12A here in the U.K. and if you know anything about the life of Freddie Mercury then you’d know aspects would’ve had to have been diluted to fit that 12A rating… and diluted the film is. Things like the drug usage is not explicitly shown and only hinted at, Freddie’s bisexuality is lightly shown with a couple of gay kisses and that’s about it. But I didn’t go the film to watch gay sex, I went to watch a film about Freddie’s life and that is what I got. There is a scene where Freddie throws one of his infamous lavish parties and even that is watered down from reality. The real parties are legendary in the world of music with Freddie having naked dwarfs (sorry, little people) with trays of cocaine on their head for the guests, performers biting the heads off live chickens, rampant sex and so much more. The party scene in the film shows none of this though and is not as wild as the real things were. Freddie led such an overtly hedonistic lifestyle that even the Roman Emperor Caligula would have suggested that Freddie tone it down a bit. Plus the film shows Brian May not enjoying the party when in reality, he was one of the people who would suggest them and enjoyed himself as much as Freddie.

Second, I didn’t like when the film ended. Note I didn’t say “how” it ended but “when”. To be honest, the recreation of the Live Aid set is stunning, those last ten minutes or so of the flick that show an abridged version of Queen’s now legendary performance is jaw dropping. But there is so much more to the story of Queen after Live Aid that is not shown in the film. Live Aid was their turning point, they had all but broken up and were thought of as a washed up band (especially in America) with nothing left. After that gig, Queen went on to become world dominating and there is so much more story to be told about their music. Plus there is the relationship between Freddie and his lover Jim Hutton to explore which is only lightly touched on in the film, his continual relationship with Mary Austin to the point where Freddie became godfather to her son. And of course there is the death of the man himself and how he kept recording despite the fact he was in so much pain and discomfort right to the very end. There really is so much more story to be told about Freddie/Queen and this really feels like only half a film. Its a fantastic half a film, but still only half of the story. I’ve seen a tone of these biopics and always felt satisfied at the end but this film left a bit of a gap and needs a sequel, there must be a Bohemian Rhapsody 2. Just having a bit of text at the end of the film pointing out Freddie died of bronchial pneumonia resulting from AIDS didn’t really cut it for me.

Bohemian Rhapsody Movie Live Aid

That’s about it for the negatives really. On to the positives.

The cast have to be addressed here. Of course Rami Malek as Freddie Mercury is amazing. He has the voice, the mannerisms and everything. There are times during the Live Aid finale when a few long shots are shown and I’m not sure of it was Rami or Freddie himself using actual Live Aid footage. In fact, I’m pretty sure I spotted a cheeky cameo from the real Freddie during one shot. The strutting on stage the arm waving/air punching, Rami has it all nailed. I said earlier how there can never, nor will there ever be anyone quite like Freddie Mercury and I stand by that – but Rami Malek is pretty bloody close. I’d like to see a side by side comparison between the actual Live Aid footage and the end scene in this film to see just how close it all was. Everyone is talking about Rami Malek’s performance and rightly so to as its (almost) flawless, but I think he’s already getting enough praise. He deserves every ounce of it too and any recognition or awards he may get along the way. But there are other equally as great performances too.

Bohemian Rhapsody Movie Brian May.jpg

The other three band members of Brian May, Roger Taylor and John Deacon played by Gwilym Lee, Ben Hardy and Joseph Mazzello respectively are all brilliant. Four great actors coming together to reunite four of the best musicians in music. After Rami Malek, Gwilym Lee’s Brian May was the stand out performance for me though. Brian in the film is just as spot on as Freddie is and I just feel that Rami Malek (as deserving as he is) will overshadow the other actors here. Gwilym Lee deserves just as much praise. Then there is Lucy Boynton as Mary Austin, Freddie’s former girlfriend and long time friend. Yet another strong performance that I feel will be overlooked. You really feel her pain as she loses her boyfriend but refuses to give up on him at the same time.

But my absolute favorite bit of casting? Its really just a glorified cameo from Mike Myers as Ray Foster the EMI records executive who turns down the Bohemian Rhapsody record after listening to it. Now I can’t remember the exact quote, but after hearing the record he says something along the lines of, “Teenagers won’t be banging their heads to this”. Seeing as it was Mike Myers who introduced Bohemian Rhapsody to a new legion of fans with his movie Wanye’s World in 1992 and helped get the song to the top of the charts seventeen years after its original release, its a great in-joke…

As a quick aside. Freddie actually got to see the above scene before he died in 1991 as the film was completed before his passing and released a few months following his death. Brain May has said that Freddie loved the scene and gave Mike Myers his blessing to use the song too. So Mike Myers being the guy to turn the song down its a fitting tribute as well as an ironic joke.

I’m sorry but I must break out an overused cliché here. The film is a roller-coaster of emotions. There are funny and light hearted moments that will leave you with a smile on your face. Such as the band discussing the merits of the Roger Taylor penned “joke” song I’m in Love with My Car or Freddie continually telling Roger to go higher and higher on the “Galileo!” when recording Bohemian Rhapsody. Then you’ll have tears in your eyes during the more heavier scenes. Two such scenes that spring to mind are the one where Freddie finally comes out as bisexual to Mary while the song Love of My Life plays in the background, a song Freddie wrote specifically for Mary. The scene features some sterling acting from both Rami Malek and Lucy Boynton. Then later, toward the end of the film another scene has Freddie attend a hospital where he is told he has AIDS. Such a powerful scene with very little dialogue (I think there’s only one line) but the powerful and emotive Who Wants To Live Forever plays in the background. Honestly, I was welling up.

Yeah of course it goes without saying that the film’s soundtrack is sublime… but I’m going to say it anyway. Its Queen, of course its a brilliant soundtrack. It was great to hear some of the very early stuff such as Keep Yourself Alive, one of my favourite early Queen songs that doesn’t get the recognition it deserves. Seeing how some songs were slowly created and evolved such as Brian May slowly building We Will Rock You with the iconic foot stomps and claps was joyful.

Bohemian Rhapsody Movie We Will Rock You

As for the Live Aid finale. The hairs on the back of my neck were standing up. I have very strong memories of watching Live Aid live back in 85. Both myself and my mom sat there staring at the T.V. in awe while Queen did their thing. I think I was only about 8 or 9 at the time but that twenty odd minutes watching Queen at Wembley Stadium left a lasting impression on me. Then there I was, a now 42 year old man sitting in the cinema with my mom next to me reliving that same experience 33 years later. Honestly, one of the best moments I have witnessed on the big screen. Then as Queen were in the midst of belting out Radio Ga Ga, mom leaned over to me and simply said “it has to be done.” and I knew exactly what she meant, so up went the arms and we both clapped along to the chorus. So there were me and mom doing the Radio Ga Ga bit and as I looked around, other people in the cinema joined in. It was almost like being there live, a genuinely amazing experience. The seats in the cinema gently rocked back and forth as people tapped/stomped their feet and clapped along. A special thanks to my mom for reliving a childhood memory with me.

The re-enactment of Live Aid at the end of this film is stunning and clearly done with passion, worth the price of the ticket alone.

Bohemian Rhapsody Movie Radio Ga Ga.jpg

If you’re a Queen fan, of course you are going to watch the film and you’ll enjoy it too. Just remember that it is a biopic and some elements have been altered to make the film more interesting. Its not a factual documentary but its still telling the story of the greatest front-man ever and one of the greatest rock bands to ever grace a stage. So then, is This The Real Life, Is This Just Fantasy? It’s a bit of both really, but more real life than fantasy. If you’re not a Queen fan, I still suggest checking the film out. Its funny, its emotional and above all, it rocks! You never know, you might just end up becoming a fan of Queen yourself.

A cracking film with laughs, tears, awesome music and some truly amazing performances from the entire cast. It Will Rock You!

Bohemian Rhapsody Movie Live Aid Crowd

We just need a sequel to finish the story up.

“I pity your wife if you think six minutes is forever.”

– Freddie Mercury