Bad Boys II (2003) Review:

When Michael Bay, Will Smith and Martin Lawrence landed on screen with their first action outing in Bad Boys (1995), it's quite possible not many realized at the time how this would take them forward. Will Smith would soon end his career with The Fresh Prince of Bel-Air and go onto other blockbuster films like Men In Black (1997). Martin Lawrence though would continue mainly with comedic roles starring in films like Big Momma's House (2000). As for Michael Bay he would stick two more money makers with The Rock (1996) and Armageddon (1998). It wouldn’t only be until 2003 that these three converged again on this sequel much of which fans were anticipating. Unfortunately, it's not as great a followup due to a number of reasons.

Written by newcomers to the franchise Jerry Stahl and Ron Shelton, the script for this sequel is average at best. The main reason for this is that it gets bogged down with too much inconsistent direction. Mike Lowrey (Will Smith) and Marcus Burnett (Martin Lawrence) are still working together, but it seems lately Lowrey is being more reckless than usual. Finally, Marcus feels he needs to distance himself from Mike. Meanwhile, a Cuban drug lord named Tapia (Jordi Mollà) is working to smuggle as much of his drugs and money in a short period of time and the cops' Captain Howard (Joe Pantoliano) wants to understand all the wreckless behavior going on lately.

This is the condensed version of the plot. There actually doesn't seem to be much more in story, but the length at which this is drawn out is laborious. Bad Boys (1995) runtime was two hours and while it was long, it did have a number of entertaining things going for it. Here, now clocking in at two and half hours, the execution feels padded. There's also a subplot revolving around some Russian (Peter Stormare) who's in on it with Tapia but this doesn't go anywhere. There's even another subplot about Mike Lowrey hooking up with Marcus' sister Syd (Gabrielle Union). It's all just Michael Bay's attempt at comedy and/or character development because the way it happens feels forced just because.

This leads to the comedic aspects of the film being ho-hum. The kinds of jokes thrown around in the film is okay to flat. It's really hit and miss because of how lackluster it feels. Thankfully, the chemistry between Will Smith and Martin Lawrence feel authentic. They both play well off each other and it seems like both had a good time. The thing is, while their chemistry works,...it's the way the script was written that doesn't allow them to shine like they did in the first film. That's also not to say the other cast members don't try. Theresa Randle returns as Marcus' wife, an early Michael Shannon, Yul Vazquez and Jason Manuel Olazabal all have small roles to play. Jordi Mollà is probably one of the most uninteresting villains in a while.

Visually the cinematography is well shot and has vastly improved over the work from the first film. One of the small improvements. Shot by Amir Mokri who before this worked on Pacific Heights (1990), further shows the audience all kinds of scenic shots. The action was also very enjoyable; which usually doesn't fail a Bay film. Sadly, music was a downgrade. Due to creative differences between Mark Mancina of the first film and Michael Bay, Mancina was replaced with Trevor Rabin. And it's not that Rabin is a bad composer, because he has made good music. But here, he followed Bay's direction which lacked any kind of thematic material the first score contained. Leaving the sequel with no kind of musical identity. Sigh.

As a sequel, it will entertain the fans who enjoyed the first film. However, for those looking for a little more than the same, it will feel pretty average with generic music, inconsistent comedic elements and an over bloated run time. The only thing that has remained credible is the improved camerawork, fun action sequences and good chemistry between actors.

Points Earned --> 5:10

House of Wax (1953) Review:

The way horror films are portrayed now are nothing as they used to be. The "horrific" acts that are depicted on film today make the older films seem like kids could watch. This is obviously due to the time period they were released. If people from that time saw the films being made today, they might be traumatized for life. Unlike viewers today who are practically desensitized to all that happens on the screen. Yet, the idea of showing horror in a non-violent way walks a fine line between dull or creepy. This film managed to shock audiences as well as give off creepy vibes thanks to its premise. Which in all honesty, when are wax figures not creepy? That's kind of a given.

Phyllis Kirk

This film is a remake of the Mystery of the Wax Museum (1933) staring Vincent Price as Prof. Henry Jarrod, a humble artistic sculptor who enjoys modeling wax figurines. That is until a former business partner Matthew Burke (Roy Roberts) who's not satisfied with his investment, decides to burn down Jarrod's livelihood with him inside. This in turn heavily disfigures Jarrod which causes him to go insane and simultaneously setting up shop again as the House of Wax. Written by Crane Wilbur from Crime Wave (1953), the story for its time can be seen as a re-invigorator of horror genre. This is interesting seeing that the antagonist is clearly revealed from the beginning, which isn't a norm now.

But that doesn't stop the entertainment value of the experience. Seeing how the story plays out with direction from André De Toth (who also directed Crime Wave (1953)) is still an engaging watch. Sadly, not a whole lot is given as to how Jarrod survived the destruction of his first life. Sometimes things are better left untouched, but this particular event feels like it needs an explanation. On top of that, the way some characters are written can be silly at times. It takes all of one shot glass to break a man into spilling the truth. One, partially filled shot glass. That and there are some continuity issues regarding how Jarrod hides his deformities. It's truly nonsensical when you think about it. Then again, in 1953 people may have not thought of it.

The actors cast for this film work well. The legendary Vincent Price is always a joy to watch and listen to with the way he articulates himself. Phyllis Kirk plays Sue Allen, the woman who feels she's being watched from a dark assailant. Her partner Scott Andrews (Paul Picerni) ends up working for Jarrod as a sculptor himself. There, working for Jarrod is Leon Averill (Nedrick Young) and Igor (Charles Bronson). There's also appearances from Carolyn Jones playing Cathy Gray, a friend of Sue Allen, Det. Lt. Tom Brennan (Frank Lovejoy) who tries to put the pieces together on things and Sidney Wallace (Paul Cavanagh) the second partner of Jarrod's to help finance his attractions. All perform credibly.

"Don't mind him,...he's just hanging around"

The effects and practical sets used in this feature were a nice visual treat. The wax figures show in the film do have that strange life-like feel, especially when the plot thickens. The scene where Jarrod's livelihood burns down is very intense too, because as it turns out, the fire actually got out of control while filming. Yikes. Thankfully cinematographer Bert Glennon captured a lot of that footage. Being that he had been filming since the 1920s, I'm sure he'd seen many things by then. He even helped in Alice in Wonderland (1933). Then there's the film score by David Buttolph, which sadly hasn't found an official release. However, the music still entertains with its classic Hollywood movie sound and fits the film’s tone.

Aside from the way some characters are written and the occasional unclear continuity problems, this classic Hollywood horror film is intriguing to watch. Thanks to its cast of actors, very much real effects, creepy atmosphere and music.

Points Earned --> 7:10

Bedazzled (2000) Review:

Hollywood through the decades has been fairly consistent in how it makes movies. Or at least, the more recent decades so it seems. The usual complaint is that studios keep remaking films and rebooting franchises from the past. Whether this be just to hit people with nostalgia who know the original(s) already, or to introduce a new generation to the story, the tendency for them to be successful is very unlikely. No matter the case, it happens all the time. Perhaps what's more disappointing is when the end result is middle of the road. If it's good, it's something people will talk about. If it's bad, it's possible even more people will talk about it. However, for this film, it's just average, which makes it forgettable at best.

"See, it's nothing like George of the Jungle..."

The plot is about an insecure man by the name of Elliot Richards (Brendan Fraser) who tries to be friendly, but only comes across awkward to his co-workers Dan (Orlando Jones), Bob (Paul Adelstein), Jerry (Toby Huss) and Carol (Miriam Shor). One night after running in with them at a bar, Richards sees Alison (Frances O'Connor), a girl he is very interested in. When he realizes he will be avoided after he tries introducing himself, he asks god for "anything to have that girl in his life". This leads to the entrance of the Devil (Elizabeth Hurley), legitimately the devil. There Richards is given the proposition, to sell his soul to the devil in exchange for seven wishes of anything desires. Of course, that may come with some strings attached, of which Richards may not be thinking of.

Written by Peter Tolan (Analyze This (1999)), Larry Gelbart (Tootsie (1982)), and Harold Ramis (Ghostbusters (1984)), the script for this remake is nothing to be bedazzled over. The story itself is one that has been depicted before - the nerdy and ignored protagonist can't seem to cut a break. Only to find something that sounds better than it really is. Audiences enjoy seeing the underdog being given a chance at redemption. Here though, it seems all too easy to know the execution of the story. It's a story that tries to push boundaries by adding more sex appeal with the change in the devil's gender, but all it does is come across half invested. This is unfortunate seeing that Ramis also directed this movie.

Not to mention that this film draws similar parallels to that of another one of Ramis’ films from earlier, that being Groundhog Day (1993). While Fraser's character doesn't fumble over the same day again and again, he instead makes several wishes not realizing the impending side effects. This is majority of the comedic elements of the film. And while at times it produces a chuckle here and there, it is not that clever either. Sometimes the coincidences that occur throughout the story are truly just eye rolling. As the old saying goes, "what are the odds"? The odds are just about the same as Elliot Richards' colleagues also being by his side in every wish that he makes as well. What can be said is that the actors do try, with Fraser and Hurley doing their best with the material given.

Francis O'Connor

There's even appearances from Brian Doyle-Murray and Gabriel Casseus. The visuals are okay for the most part, but when CGI does get involved, it isn't very good looking. The cinematography shot by Bill Pope was competently handled. Being that Pope had also worked on Darkman (1990), Army of Darkness (1992) and The Matrix (1999), it's no surprise that his talent remains consistent here too. For music, the film score was composed by David Newman. However, since this is a comedy, much of the score is not audible as much of the comedic elements are replaced with other songs from other artists. Most notably Tone-Lōc's Wild Thing, which is the theme for Hurley's portrayal as the devil. Adequate, but lacks character.

As a remake is isn't bad, but it's not decent either. Coming from Harold Ramis, it would seem this would work out well. Instead, the music, special effects and execution of the plot is average. The plus side is, the actors do perform as best they can and the cinematography is well shot. But it’s not memorable.

Points Earned --> 5:10