The Man From Nowhere [2010]

The child of a pawnbroker’s neighbor is kidnapped by the local gangsters – and he’s pulled into a drug drama between the cops and the gangsters. Good thing he’s got the skills to deal with it.


This is a nice little revenge film that’s very reminiscent to Leon: The Professional, Man on Fire and Taken. Unfortunately, for this film – it takes a more subdued approach than those films which are more over-the-top – and though The Man From Nowhere attempts the over-the-top style in parts – it doesn’t quite abuse them to the point that it should.


The characters are cartoonishly outlandish – I think they were my favorite part of the film. The hairstyles and personality traits to all the characters were very bold – and over-the-top – it was great! I felt like with the way they were shot – that I was watching an anime – though (thankfully) it wasn’t shot like an overly-caffeinated headache-inducing anime.


The fact that the characters were so very outlandish – but the action did not follow that nature was what I kind of found disappointing. Some of what could’ve been defining action was off camera – where you saw a window crash – or just saw bodies on the ground – and you were left with the discovery of what happened – made the film feel slow.
There were a couple of great knife sequences – and a knife fight that was quite amazing – but the fact is; they were knives. Knives are hard to follow action-wise when they are as short as they are.


For a hard hitting epic revenge ending – yes – this one deserves to be on that list I made last month. It was improbable as all get out – but that’s what you want! The ending showed what was possible the entire film – but I guess it could be argued the film was building to it – and didn’t want to expend energy in the build-up – but you’ve got to keep us interested as an audience.


The film concentrated too much on the police – who are important characters – but not as important as the Pawnbroker and the Gangsters. I’m not saying they dominated the film – but some of their sequences were unnecessary – 15 minutes could’ve been trimmed of their story and made a tighter film that would’ve felt more action packed.
The cops spent time concocting a plan to discover the true identity of the Pawnbroker – when as an audience – for the past 20 years – we have been trained to know that this Pawnbroker is actually an ex-special-something-guy... It’s wasted time discovering what the Pawnbroker used to be – but discovering the reason why he cares so much – that’s interesting – but it was ultimately answered by the Pawnbroker – so the cops side stories were unnecessary.


I do appreciate that the directing was more subtle – and it portrays more of the sad story of the Pawnbroker – and even though I WANTED it to be over-the-top (and if you make note of my critics they are mostly based on what I WANTED not what the FILM ACTUALLY IS) – I need to get over it and admit – it’s a pretty damn good film – and when I go back and watch it with a different mindset – I will be in a better place to fully appreciate it for what it is.


I recommend it – for what it is – it’s a plot hole riddled, hard hitting, fun revenge film.

U is for...

Winner of four Academy Awards, including best picture, director, supporting actor, and best editing, Clint Eastwood's 1992 masterpiece stands as one of the greatest and most thematically compelling Westerns ever made. "The movie summarized everything I feel about the Western," said Eastwood at the time of the film's release. "The moral is the concern with gunplay." To illustrate that theme, Eastwood stars as a retired, once-ruthless killer-turned-gentle-widower and hog farmer. He accepts one last bounty-hunter mission--to find the men who brutalized a prostitute--to help support his two motherless children. Joined by his former partner (Morgan Freeman) and a cocky greenhorn (Jaimz Woolvett), he takes on a corrupt sheriff (Oscar winner Gene Hackman) in a showdown that makes the viewer feel the full impact of violence and its corruption of the soul. Dedicated to Eastwood's mentors Sergio Leone and Don Siegel and featuring a colorful role for Richard Harris, it's arguably Eastwood's crowning directorial achievement. (synopsis provided by Amazon.com)

released 1992

directed by Clint Eastwood

S is for... [part 3]

Only twelve minutes into Sex & Fury, our badass heroine Ocho (Reiko Ike) duels a dozen men in the snow with a samurai sword--stark naked! You can bet Quentin Tarentino watched a lot of "Pinky Violence" flicks as he was working on Kill Bill. Ocho--gambler, pickpocket, and all-around babe--wants to avenge the murder of her father. She picks up their trail after helping a would-be anarchist assassin escape from the law, only to become embroiled in political machinations with a Western badass gambler/secret agent of dubious loyalty (Christina Lindberg, Thriller: A Cruel Picture, a.k.a. They Call Her One-Eye). You'd expect a movie like this to have a lot of lurid sequences but no plot to speak of; the particular glory of Sex & Fury is that lurid sequences abound--rape of a virgin, girl-on-girl action, garish spurting blood, a squad of switch-blade-wielding nuns (!)--and it has a coherent (if utterly preposterous) story. Ike, star of similar movies like Female Yakuza Tale: Inquisition and Torture and the Girl Boss series (all exemplary of the Japanese "Pinky Violence" subgenre), is by turns vulnerable and tough as nails. Her powerful presence lifts Sex & Fury above mere sadistic kicks and gives it an actual emotional core, underscored with psychedelic guitar. (synopsis provided by Amazon.com)

released 1973

directed by Norifumi Suzuki

Top 5 Revenge Films*

It seems perverse to me to celebrate someone’s death – but I can’t help but feel good that we’ve finally got that asshole. So, with that in mind - I decided to do a top 5 on revenge films - but narrow it to the conclusion of the films; the final acts of vengeance*

I really enjoy me a good revenge film - and I could go up and down my favorite movie list and put down the first 5 revenge films that show up - but some don't seem to have the punctuation that others have. Such as PUNCH-DRUNK LOVE which has a great ending - and I consider a revenge film - but as much as I love the end – it feels anticlimactic in a way. The same goes for OLDBOY – which has a fucking great end – but turns you on your head so badly that it’s hard to say it’s satisfying solely as a revenge film as your focus shifts so much. Also films like SEX & FURY, MAN ON FIRE and KILL BILL – where the build up to the final act far surpasses the ending to a point where as good as it was – you feel a little jipped. Honorable mentions go out too many to mention as revenge classics - though they may or may not fit my criteria.

#5. INGLORIUS BASTERDS [2009, directed by Quentin Tarantino] – Now, I may find this film overly long, overly talkie and self-indulgent to the point of frustration – and even though it’s more of a “men on a mission film” – it really is hard to deny that ending as pure greasy fried delicious vengeance. With two very big Nazi killing porn exclamation points that act as the cherry on top of this sundae. Unlike Tarantino’s DEATHPROOF the ending justifies me wanting to watch all the casual conversation as way of building tension all over again to catch the final acts.


#4. MAD MAX [1979, directed by George Miller] – Long before SAW threw a hacksaw at our feet and told us our options – Max gave us one of the most chilling and most well deserved endings in revenge cinematic history. MAD MAX is also one of the greatest film paradigms of how destructive revenge can be. The once charismatic Max becomes despondent and empty – because the hole that was created by the biker gang that doesn’t fill itself back in once his mission of revenge is complete – as we can tell from the other films in the series. That’s what drives revenge though it’s the emotion of it all – the exacting of it – if we were to know what happens after – would we still do it? In Max’s case – I think he would. And what’s brilliant about the ending is it’s that emotion that’s left in the viewer when Johnny is given his decision – and Max walks back to his car.




#3. THRILLER: A CRUEL PICTURE [1974, directed by Bo Arne Vibenius] – After long, punishing, grueling sequences of repeated abuse, rape and torture – THRILLER gives us every drop of sweet pure revenge – by giving us super slow motion gun fights and action sequences so perverse – it could be viewed as almost as punishing as what she went through – and that would be the point.


#2. LADY VENGEANCE [2005, directed by Chan-wook Park] – Not as action packed as OLDBOY – or even as poignant in the idea that the act of seeking revenge is far more destructive than getting it - but certainly an ending that elicits a certain amount of justifiable satisfaction that OLDBOY doesn’t provide. There’s a certain element of disgust – but the brutality is in many ways left to your imagination – which makes it worse – because you imagine what he deserves and in your own way become a participant in the revenge.




#1. UNFORGIVEN [1992, directed by Clint Eastwood] – My favorite film of all time – but also happens to have my favorite scene of revenge ever put to celluloid. The entire film is in fact a revenge film – where Will, Ned and the kid all go after some cowboys who cut up some prostitutes – but it’s not until the final 20 minutes that the full destructive power and the demon that Will had become shows its face. It’s got the dialogue – it’s got the action – it’s got the bone chilling horror of everything one could ever hope for a scene of pure vengeance to ever witness. What comes walking into that bar to confront Little Bill is no longer of this Earth – its brutality is nothing any human could muster – the fear in the eyes of all the men tell you – the way they run, hide and refuse to shoot – tells you that if they fuck with the devil – the devil will not forget.

O is for...

In the realm of revenge thrillers, you'd be hard pressed to find more ultra-violent vengeance and psycho thrills than in the creepy story of Oldboy. This Korean import made a pop splash at the Cannes Film Festival and during its limited theatrical run thanks to the imprimatur of Quentin Tarantino, who raved about it and its visionary director, Chan-wook Park, to anyone who would listen. It's easy to see why QT fell in love with the grindhouse attitude, fast-paced action, violent imagery, and icy-black humor, but it's a disservice to think ofOldboy as another Tarantino homage or knockoff. The darkly existential undercurrent in the themes that Oldboy traces over its life-long narrative arc is much more complex and deeply disturbing than anything of its kind. The movie's tagline is, "15 years of imprisonment... 5 days of vengeance." The imprisonee is Oh Dae-Su, an ordinary Joe who is snatched off a Seoul street corner and locked away in a dank, windowless fleabag hotel room for the aforementioned 15 years. Just as abruptly he is released, and thus the five days begin. Why did this happen to Oh Dae-Su? Ah, but that would be telling, and in fact we don't know ourselves until the final wrenching scenes.

Oldboy breaks into a classic three-act saga, the first of which details the hallucinatory period of imprisonment in which Oh Dae-Su wades from mild insanity to outright psychosis in the hands of unseen yet attentive captors. Act 2 is the revenge, when an entirely different tone takes over and Oh Dae-Su moves with single-minded purpose and clarity. It's this section that has gained the most notoriety, primarily for the claw-hammer dentistry scene, the one-man-army tracking shot, and the wriggling octopus that Oh Dae-Su consumes in a sushi bar (he's been dead so long he simply needs life back inside him in any way possible). In act 3, answers finally start to emerge and the sinister atmosphere grows even more profound--not without a healthy dose of extra bloodletting, of course. Oldboy is an undeniably poetic masterpiece of tension, fury, and dynamic craft. Ultimately, its epic cycle of tragedy is of the sort that mankind has been inflicting upon itself for all time. Some of the images may be gruesome, but all converge into a kind of beauty. It's in the telling of this lurid tale that these details become one and the memories of pain ultimately heal. (synopsis provided by Amazon.com)

directed by Park Chanwook

released 2003

Faster [2010]

[This review is rated R for salty language]


The Rock gets out of jail – and starts going after the fuckers who killed his brother and put him in jail.


This film doesn’t fuck around. I LOVE THAT! We don’t need comedy – we don’t need romance – we need to see this character do what he sets out to do. He needs to be an unmovable/unstoppable object of destruction of anything in his path. Give him a gun – a muscle car – point him in a direction and let him go!


The film was pitch perfect – The Rock was a hulking beast of a revenge machine – no real acting needed – just a monster of a man going forth. Billy Bob Thornton is always interesting when given quirky strange characters to play – and his wily drug addled detective on the case was pretty good. They play a sort of cat & mouse game – unbeknownst to The Rock – which I really liked.


This wouldn’t be much of a review if I just heap praise on a no-brainer of a film like this – so let me get to what always seems to derail these kind of films; the secondary characters - namely the assassin that’s hired to stop The Rock. Ultimately – there’s nothing wrong with the character – he’s a finesse killer and respects that The Rock is a pure killing machine – but he’s just unnecessary as a character especially once you consider the film after viewing it completely. He detracts more than he adds and takes the focus off the two far more interesting characters who are playing their cat & mouse game – which is just annoying. He can be viewed as the outside set of eyes – but if that was his purpose – then they should’ve dropped his plot points which were all one way dead end streets.


The last part of the film did seem to slow down a bit as it got to the film’s ultimate conclusion – but it built up a lot of good faith in me by delivering so much in the parts proceeding that I for one could care less about the slowdown.


This film is a revenge based exploitation film that makes me miss pure action films – and not films based on franchises, comic books and children toys. This is an action film for adults who love action films – it doesn’t fuck around with the whole “let’s try and pull in a wider audience by making it PG-13 – then release the Unrated DVD/Blu-Ray” – it’s a hard R from start to finish – the way real action films should be.


I really respect DeWayne “The Rock” Johnson for taking on a film like this – I know he wants to put more of himself out there with family friendly stuff and more complex roles where he has dialogue and character development – but what’s the point of being built like a mountain and NOT play a motherfucking badass?!?!?


The film wasn’t perfect – it was great – and it tickled all the right parts of my mind that just loves watching a kick ass action film. It makes me want to eat a raw steak while drinking out of a creek and carry around my giant stick for hitting things – 5 out of 5 (really more of a 4 out of 5 – but why not the extra bump?)

L is for...

The third stop in Chan-wook Park's breathless revenge trilogy, Lady Vengeance comes down slightly--just slightly--from the astonishing highs of middle segment Oldboy. Elegant and ultraviolent in equal measures, Lady Vengeance requires rapt attention from the opening moments, as Park unloads his set-up in a jumble of characters and flashbacks. At the center is a doll-faced ex-con named Geum-ja (Yeong-ae Lee), who just spent 13 years in the slammer for killing a little boy. There's much more to her case than the public knows, and Geum-ja has been carefully, quietly preparing for revenge against the man who put her in this situation. We watch those gears turning throughout the movie, but as Lady Vengeancenears its completion it broadens into an even bigger event than Geum-ja expected. Funny and horrifying, Lady Vengeance is as measured as Geum-ja's own preparations, and has a gorgeous sort of logic about it. As impressive as those machinations are to watch, the movie doesn't make as forceful an argument as Oldboy on just how revenge might be as punishing to the revenge-taker as for his target. Lee is a cool heroine, and Min-sik Choi, who did such heroically exhausting service in Oldboy, is here employed as the monster. (The film's title in the U.S., Lady Vengeance, is different from international title Sympathy for Lady Vengeance, a closer tie to the first part of the trilogy, Sympathy for Mr. Vengeance.) (synopsis provided by Amazon.com)

directed by Park Chanwook

released 2005

Harry Brown [2009]

My hopes from the short description and from the poster was this would be a bit of an over the top action film like Taken or a continuance of Caine’s best - Get Carter.

My fears were that this film was going to be an style over substance – Guy Ritchie type of film where Caine would be delivering lines that weren’t designed to be said – just written to be clever.

What I got was more of a heavy drama that felt like it should be a BBC produced mini-series – with just the right amount of hard violence and a very good story.

The story was a bit broken – and didn’t really feel to have been resolved fully – there was a bit more meat to the story to be explored. To be presented in a movie format rather than a BBC mini-series I felt like it needed a few random touches to complete it – which was kind of disappointing. There were a bit too many “happy” coincidences for my likes – considering the hard path it was going drama wise. I almost felt ripped off by the end of the film.

It was good – but the first time director Daniel Barber didn’t use a couple of well written scenes – that could’ve brought a lot of emotional tension to the story to the best of his ability. It’s also one of those movies where a good story, a few good ideas and a few interesting pieces happen to carry it through the weak parts of the film.

It was well acted – and though I wanted more from several aspects of the film – I’m still giving it a 4 out of 5.

Weekend Viewing - Mar 5-7

Oldboy [2003, Chan-wook Park]

Oh Dae-su is abducted and locked in a room for 15 years. He has no idea who’s locked him in the room – and once he’s released he starts is plan for vengeance with a young sushi chef named Mi-do at his side. But once it becomes clear that quick blood-thirsty vengeance is not enough to atone for the 15 years he’s lost – he demands answers – but which is worse the curiosity or the knowing?

Even though I’ve seen Oldboy several times – it remains powerful – disturbing and interesting. The direction – performances – and storyline remain fresh and amazing in their execution. At times I debate if Lady Vengeance is a superior film – the entire Park “vengeance trilogy” are something to behold. They recall enough of the Japanese pinku genre – as well as the 70’s revenge film genre – that pleases my soul. 5 out of 5.

The House of the Devil [2009, directed by Ti West]

A young girl hard up for some money to move out – takes a babysitting job – FROM HELL!

It claims that it was made in a 1980’s style – which to me can mean any number of things. I was on the edge of my seat the entire film waiting for leggings and references to pop culture and someone to turn to someone and say “Hey, it’s the 80’s did you do a lot of coke and vote for Ronald Reagan today?” – but none of that bullshit flew. It reminded me of an actual film that could’ve been made in the 80’s – one that I would actually watch! Jocelin Donahue was so cute and likable in the lead role and that’s important as it’s almost a one person show – as the film builds up tension with somewhat moderate success. I’m giving it a 4 out of 5.

Female Prisoner #701 Scorpion: Beast Stable [1973]

After watching the first Female Prisoner #701 Scorpion film – I wasn’t exactly impressed – I wanted a pinky violence film but got a women-in-prison film. Even though I was disappointed - I really wanted to give the second film - Jailhouse 41 - a try. The only problem with that is the second film is mysteriously out of print – yet the third and fourth films in the series come in a box set along with the first. In the mood for a kind of pinky violence film – I decided to give Beast Stable a shot.

Scorpion (played by Meiko Kaji) is still on the run from the law – ever since her boyfriend a crooked cop set her up in the first film. Beast Stable opens with Scorpion narrowly escaping capture by cutting off a detectives arm after he handcuffs her. Yuki, a prostitute, meets Scorpion as she’s trying to escape the handcuffs – and takes her in. Scorpion goes on to cross a local gangster – while the one armed detective is still searching for her – but little do they know - they don’t want to corner the Scorpion.

This film is fantastic in so many aspects – I’m really kicking myself for not watching it sooner. It’s visually stunning and surreal – but that’s not to say that it doesn’t have a pretty good dose of sleaze, violence and exploitation-like bizarreness. When I say a pretty good dose – I don’t mean over-the-top – it’s fairly low-key when compared to other pinky violence films released by Toei around the same time.

I really liked Meiko Kaji as the Scorpion – first off she’s gorgeous – secondly she’s the lead character but has so few lines - so she has to play the character more with body language and blank facial expressions that blossom when alone (or with Yuki - who I felt there was a developing quiet love story). You also have to take into account that she’s an escapee so she’s also got to blend in and be so subtle about all that she does in public – even though she’s an extremely dangerous person to the people who cross her.

Kaji has the direction of Shunya Ito to thank for really helping pull together a great performance with a great film. Ito uses surreal elements to help provide tension or to help express what the Scorpion has bottled up inside of her. He also uses the composition of the frame and the angle at which he shoots as a way of helping build up the audiences reaction to a particular scene.

I thought it was interesting – that the film dealt with a taboo politically charged topic at one point – that was handled and show in two different ways simultaneously – as to not preach to an audience. In some of the exploitation films I’ve seen – they usually take on a taboo topic head on – and tell you – this is how you should feel and we will be exploiting it as a motive.

That’s not to say the film doesn’t have its flaws – such as how the One Armed Detective connected both Yuki and the Scorpion – maybe I missed something but Yuki never tipped her hand to anyone from what I remember. I thought Yuki’s mentally handicapped brother was a bit over the top – but that’s what an exploitation film is supposed to be (not exploited in a ‘duh-duh’ way mind you).

My only other confusion was I kept expecting the lead gangster’s woman to turn out to be a dude – but I guess she just wasn’t an attractive lady… With biggish hands… And 5 o’clock shadow...

This is a great film – and I think it’s great as part of the series – and would even work as a stand alone film. I’m giving this one a perfect 5 out of 5.

Law Abiding Citizen [2009]

Scanning the reviews on Metacritic – this film is bashed for being torture/porn and compared to Saw. I just don’t see it. It’s an over the top revenge film that does have some contraption kills – but it’s certainly not Saw.

The wife and child of Clyde Shelton (played by Gerard Butler) are killed during the course of a robbery. An ambitious assistant DA, Nick Rice (played by Jamie Foxx), decides to make sure that at least one of the perpetrators get what they deserve even if it means the other gets a light sentence. The only problem is the deal that he makes lets the wrong guy off – and Clyde is mad – 10 years later Clyde enacts a plan – and as we find out “If Clyde wants you dead. You’re dead.” Even if Clyde is behind bars!!!

This is a cat and mouse chase kind of who is smarter than whom - revenge tale. Clyde plays with Nick and his group of cops & prosecutors – as he teaches them a lesson. I don’t think anyone out there would disagree that this “lesson” is worth learning – as the law is set-up to protect its citizens – not to let killers go free. It’s the execution of the lesson plan (pun-pun-pa-pun-pun) that raises the question.

Can the “hero” of the film be the one killing innocent people? Or is the hero of the film the one who let an innocent family’s killer go free?

My problem with the film is that I think the message gets a little muddled – and they tend to over-sympathize with Clyde – therefore making it harder to root for Nick. Maybe it’s the script – maybe it’s the actors – but it’s hard to feel sorry for what seems like an unsympathetic and cocky prosecutor – who has his entire life in front of him – and doesn’t regret making the deal to let the killer go free. Versus’ a scorned father – who’s charisma almost makes you forgive the fact that he’s causing horrible things to happen to people.

Your like or dislike of this film is ultimately going to be based on who you like more – rather than based on who is “right”. Both characters are ultimately “right” and “wrong” in their decisions – the DA does his job the way the law allows him to do his job even if it means making deals with murderers – Clyde is taking out the trash but also crosses the line on whom he considers “trash”. Considering one character is more sympathetic than the other – if you whole-heartedly disagree with Clyde – then you will probably dislike the film.

The direction was standard – as was the entire production – nothing that makes it stand out. I finished it maybe a half-hour ago – and there wasn’t truly any memorable scenes that make me want to watch it again. The acting was all right – though I thought Foxx should’ve come off as more sympathetic than he did.

I liked the film more than I disliked it – there was enough intrigue that kept me interested – and even though there were some big plot holes (the most glaring of which addressed head-on as soon as I thought it up) – I didn’t mind rooting for Clyde and his quest taking down the “corrupt” system. On first viewing – I’ll give it a 4 out of 5 – but I can see it settling more around a 3 if I watched it again in the near future.

[directed by F. Gary Gray]