B-Movie Kicks: Max Havoc- Curse of the Dragon

Who demanded this movie?  Mickey Hardt is a Swiss Actor who does martial-arts.  According to IMDB, he was given his first big break by Donnie Yen.  Anyone remember that?  Didn't think so.  Well, a year after that, he got a starring role in Max Havoc: Curse of the Dragon.  Anyone remember this movie?  In the old days (read: about two years ago) when video stores were prevalent, crap like this was all over the place.  Studios were churning generic action film after generic action film, attempting to make them look more interesting in a variety of ways.  In this film's case, it's Joanna Krupa in a bikini.  Well, it's better than Afghant Knights.  So what is the film about?  Well, Max Havoc is a man with a past...but now he takes photos.  His adventures take him to Guam, where he gets caught up in a plot involving a stolen artifact and...David Carradine.  Aw, you could have done better.  The other formerly-big star here- Richard Roundtree.  Don't worry- he's not in it long.  To find out if one of Hardt's two U.S. films is any good, read on...

Max is a man with a past.  He abhors violence.  In his second scene, he gets in a random and pointless fight.  Make sense to me.

The plot involves the Jade Dragon- nice and cliche- being taken from David Carradine's house and taken to Guam.  If you're going to sell illegal goods, why not go there after all?

Havoc is troubled by his past.  He was a kickboxer and he accidentally killed a guy.  Look at the bright side- at least you didn't kick his head off!  Oh yeah, they play this footage at least five times- I hope you like it!

In Guam, Havoc meets up with his old trainer, who also buys antiquities.  Gee, I wonder what he gets at his shop...

Enough of that plot- women in bikinis.  What was I talking about just now?

Oh right- murder.  Carradine sends his thugs to Guam and they kill the lady that stole the artifact.  They also kill Roundtree.  Sucks for the audience, but at least Richard got to enjoy the rest of his vacation.

Of course, he's also never shown outside.  For all we know, he shot his scenes in Los Angeles.

Did I mention that Carmen Electra was in this movie?  Well, she is.  She's completely unimportant and only appears three times, but she is in it.

Our heroine doesn't show up to the first meeting to return the Dragon.  She says that she won't do it, since she needs to sell it to help her sister out.  Her sister tells her to give it back.  So she decides to do so.  That happened.

In the Finale, Max fights this bald, martial-artist guy named 'Baldy.'  He wins, so Carradine gives her a super-expensive sword in exchange for giving them their stuff back.  The End.

What can I really say about this movie?  It's a dumb, silly action film.  It doesn't have a lot of action in it, at least not regularly.  The action scenes are randomly-cut in here, not really being set up all that much.  That opening action scene is just random and unnecessary.  One of them is supposed to 'ironic' because it interrupts a wire-filled Wuxia fight scene being filmed...outside of a Guam hotel.  That makes sense to me!  The movie is loaded down with romance and an attempts to make us care.  There are a few problems with this.  One- the characters have all the depth of a puddle.  Two- Joanna Krupa and Mickey Hardt are not great actors.  Three- their chemistry is pretty much non-existent.  When Electra shows up in her second- and last- actual scene, they set up a romantic conflict.  It's resolved within seconds, rendering the whole thing- entirely pointless.  The action scenes are decent enough, but the final one is way too short.  Plus, it's shot in a dimly-lit room, rendering it hard to follow.  As a side note, this fight was apparently Directed by someone other than Pyun.  That man- Isaac Florentine.  No, he's not a dish with spinach in it, he's the guy who made Ninja.  Give him actual lighting and he can actually make a decent scene happen- they don't.  Maybe the sequel will get things right (ha ha).  Take us away, thing I can find on the Internet and also in this movie...

Next up, another Albert Pyun film (no, I didn't plan this).  It's the long-delayed sequel to a 1982 film...and boy is it awful.  Stay tuned...

Corman Anthology: Angel III- The Final Chapter

Angel times three.  We're back with the third film in the Angel series and a lot more has changed.  As his tradition, we have a new actress playing the part.  The film takes place roughly seven years after the last film, so you might be able to excuse this.  Although, again, they always cast actresses older than they're actually supposed to be for the plot, putting a big hole in that excuse.  In addition to our lead, her Supporting Cast is all gone too.  Rory Calhoun said 'No' to you guys?  The Yo-Yo Chaplin guy isn't here either?  Well, fortunately, they got a guy who vaguely looks like Reb Brown- and wasn't in Howling V- so I guess that makes up for it.  They also introduce a brand new tradition to Angel- presenting characters from her past that were never shown or mentioned before.  I think it's called a 'Qui-Gon.'  As the teaser mentioned, this film wraps up the 'my mother left me when I was younger' plot, although it just serves to set up the film's main story arc involving prostitutes segueing into porn (big step, I know).  To find out how not-final this film is, read on...

Remember how Angel/Molly was a Law Student in the last film?  Well, now she's a Photographer.  Who said anything about wanting to be a Lawyer?  Not me, obviously!

Angel returns to L.A. to find her mother, since a tip led her there.   Before we move on, take a moment to really enjoy this last bit of '80s fashion (the film was made in '89).

Unfortunately, the happy meeting is ruined by a car bomb.  Yeah, that plot thread was tossed out there just like the Inspector in Avenging Angel.  Note to self- never meet Angel!

Now on the hunt for the killer(s), Angel bunks up with a friend of her's from her past.  I thought that this was supposed to be Yo-Yo/Chaplin, but it's not.  Unless this is somehow supposed to be the 'Gary Glitter' guy, they just pulled this character out of their ass!

The group teams up with "Definitely Not Reb," since he made a documentary about the prostitutes in the area and has connections that allow her to go undercover.  No, really.  Next time I need to infiltrate a Civil War re-enactment, I'll call Ken Burns!

I had to fulfill the 'Random Nudity Reference' so here we go.  I should also note that 99% of the women in this scene are topless...but Angel isn't.  Corman lead actresses never do nudity.  Right, Slumber Party Massacre series?

The trio go undercover at a party designed to hook up the prostitutes with rich businessmen.  How has this scheme been going on so long when they are this blatant?!?

Richard Roundtree- star of Amityville: The Next Generation- is on hand as a kind, caring Police Captain.  Was Ossie Davis busy this time?  He has about four scenes, so that's something.

The finale of the film comes in a warehouse.  The lead villain is locked away in an Ice Cream Truck, while her enforcer gets a hook through the back and is hung out to die.  Our heroes.  The End.

Not quite Final enough.  The plot of this movie is decent, but just feels forced.  The antagonists of Angel films seem to fit a certain mold...until now.  Low-scale for the first film, so it's a generic serial killer.  Raising the stakes for the second film, so it's some evil executives.  Trying too hard for the third film, so it's a business woman who hire prostitutes, makes movies with them and then sells them as sex slaves in exchange for drugs...which she then gives to the prostitutes and, well, you get the drift.  There are just so many elements to it that it makes it really easy to fall apart.  Case in point- Angel gets involved, because they kill her mother.  Why do they do it?  Because she was part of the scheme, which pointlessly-involved trafficking the drugs in via art exhibits.  How much are you paying for the exhibits that you ruin and, later, break to get the drugs?  Wouldn't that eat into your overhead cost?  Speaking of unexplained, how come they never rescue the one, nice prostitute who is sold into slavery?  Granted- you stopped the operation, but there's no mention of 'don't worry- we'll rescue her' or anything!  Add in the death of another prostitute before the finale and you have some bitter baggage for your happy ending!  The film is not as good as the second film, although they don't force in as much comedy this time.  A decent film, but a weak link for the series as a whole.  Hey, Walter Paisley...

Next up, the final...final Angel film.  It's about as related as your dad's best friend's dog-walker.  Stay tuned...

House of Death: Amityville- A New Generation

Another Amityville film- yes, really.  I mean, there are 8 of the damn things- nine if you count the remake.  For those who are newer to the site, I have reviewed Part 3, 4, 6 and 8.  The first one was in 3-D, kind of.  There were like four scenes that featured it.  The second one was an attempt to turn the series in a new direction and basing it on the books...but they didn't.  The next one was about an evil clock that is a deus ex machina, until you restart time and just smash it.  The last one really broke the mold by being about a doll house...that's shaped just like the house.  It's like a super voodoo doll!  So, after seven months, let's take a look at the 7th film.  By the way, I'm not doing these in any order- thank you for asking.  This film is in the same vain as 4, 6 and 8- focusing on evil items from the evil house.  In this case, it's a mirror.  I don't have high hopes for this one, but it does feature 'John Shaft' and 'Locke.'  Then again, so do Steel and Shadow Warriors, respectively.  Will this film redeem the series or just fall in line?  Get out your living art exhibit for my review of...

The film begins with three, long minutes of a shot that doesn't change.  When your lack of creativity is evident in your opening titles, the sign is not a good one.  The story proper begins with a woman watching a man break into a car.  What does it have to do with anything?  Other than setting a tone of 'the inner city is rough,' it has no point.  In the morning, a man argues outside of the door of a woman before being chased off by our film's hero.  They keep saying the word 'keys' which is confusing until they finally explain that the man's name is 'Keyes.'  Your main character is named Keyes?  What's his last name- Alicia?!?  Anyways, he lives in an apartment building that includes his girlfriend, 'John Shaft,' the lead girl from Double Dragon and the lead from An American Werewolf in London.  It's an all-star cast...if this were a different movie.  Outside, our hero is given a mirror by a homeless man.  Gee, that seems innocent enough.  Our hero is an artist, although we see none of his art in the lead-up.  In another apartment, the D.D. chick's angry boyfriend from before breaks in- while drunk- and knocks things around.  He looks in the mirror, sees his scarred face and then crashes into the window.  Apparently he's allergic to 'sugar glass' and he dies from this.  Just to not be subtle, the mirror reflects to show the Amityville house.  Oh, is that related to this strange and sudden event?  Thanks for the tip!

Things don't get any better in the neighborhood- not that you'll be surprised by this.  In the wake of the man's death, a policeman (Terry O'Quinn) shows up and investigates.  He finds out nothing- about the death, at least.  A bit later, he invites Keyes and his girlfriend to the police station to identify the body of the homeless man from before.  Later still, he goes to the gravestone and sees the man's tombstone marking him as 'Father of Keyes Thomas.'  Dun dun pointless!  At the apartment building, a series of reflections in the mirror seem to posses D.D. girl, driving her to start a fling with the former Werewolf.  This all leads up to a big scene where the giant, devil paintings in D.D. girl's place scare her into 'committing suicide.'  This is such a traumatic event that our hero goes to work and finally makes some actual art.  Unfortunately, the process of making art also leads to him finally remembering his past.  Oh yeah, he also goes to visit a mental institution too.  As a kid, he went to go see his father in the place alongside his mother.  Inside the place, his father snapped and killed the mother.  Good job, asylum security.  You're about as useful as The Asylum!  In spite of that revelation, I'm sure that the guy is completely-sane.  Right?

Yeah, not so much.  He begins to make an exhibit for an art show being held in the building, since that is totally a logical thing to happen.  'Shaft' makes a performance art piece that consists of him sitting in a chair which plays a video of him sitting in chair...with a gun pointed at him.  It's about violence on television.  Get it?  Get it?  Yeah, nothing ever comes of this obvious set-piece either- boo!  Keyes' piece in the show involves a reenactment of the dinner scene where his father killed most of his family.  Sure- that's a perfectly-sane thing to do.  Unfortunately, he's being controlled by the evil spirit of his father via the mirror.  I suppose the revelation that O'Quinn's detective was there to spy on him didn't help things either.  He rushes to the scene as Keyes enters the room and threatens violence.  After a long stand-off, he takes control of his destiny and shoots the mirror, destroying it's power.  A spirit is so evil and powerful that it infects every object in the house, but yet you can just shoot it?  Really?  The End.

This movie is bad for many reasons.  For one, the premise is just silly and a bit confusing.  The evil mirror thing was done already in other films, including the original Boogeyman film.   It was silly in 1980 and it was still silly in 1993 when they did it here.  Secondly, when did this so-called murder scene occur that they are talking about.  Having watched three out of the six films that preceded it, I don't recall any mention of it.  Is this from the book?  If so, it's a bit odd to include stuff from the book when you cut just about everything else out of it!  The acting is not that good either.  Some of it- like O'Quinn and 'Shaft's' performances- are decent, but that's about it.  It's that same formula for bad movie acting- it's either too subtle or too blunt.  There is a middle ground, you know!  The deaths are alright, but they aren't enough to really draw you in.  At this point, the whole series was just about circle the drain.  They'd done four films with evil objects by now and one film with the release year in the title.  As you saw with Dollhouse, things didn't get better- zombie dad or no zombie dad.  Well, let's just see what happens when the folks over at Platinum Dunes re-remake your series in a few years, I guess.

Next up, I make one reader happy by talking about a 2004 film starring Julian Sands.  This movie is not for bird lovers.  Stay tuned...