Lionsgate

Daniel Franzese Talks About ‘Bully’ at New Beverly Cinema

Posted on by The Ultimate Rabbit

On August 12, 2025, New Beverly Cinema presented a Larry Clark double feature of two of his films: “Bully” and “Another Day in Paradise.” Before “Bully” unfolded on the silver screen, actor and filmmaker Joel Michaely brought out a special guest: Daniel Franzese who played Derek Dzvirk. “Bully” was Daniel’s film debut, and it quickly earned him his SAG card. Daniel thanked Joel for being there and remarked how he killed Joel once in a horror movie entitled “Cruel World” where he shot him in the head.

Daniel said “Bully” was the first time he ever got to hold a screenplay in his hands, and he talked about meeting the casting director, Carmen Cuba, at his audition.

Daniel Fransese: She was like, “Do you wanna see who you are going to play?” I said okay, and she opened up the true crime novel (written by Jim Schutze), and I looked exactly like the guy. And I was just like, oh shit! I can actually get this! So, it was very scary and nerve wracking.”

Rumors are that the set of “Bully” was a crazy one, and being that this was Daniel’s first film as an actor, you can understand and appreciate his feelings at the time.

DF: I’m a pretty easy-going guy, and I am also a theatre guy and a standup comedian. I’m used to being around other people, and I am good at getting along with different personalities. But this movie was next level. we are getting ready to do fittings and start our first day of this movie, and Larry (Clark) is screaming because Brad (Renfro) was in jail for trying to steal a boat. He’s screaming, “This was three years of my life! This kid’s not going to ruin it!” He’s throwing papers and I was like, whoa! That was day one and you can just imagine how the stress level got worse from there.

From there, the discussion went to the late Brad Renfro who played Marty Puccio in “Bully.” Brad first gained worldwide attention at the age of 12 years old when he was cast as Marcus “Mark” Sway in Joel Schumacher’s cinematic adaptation of John Grisham’s “The Client.” Like many people on this planet, let alone actors, he died at far too young an age He was only 25 years old, when he passed away after a drug overdose. Daniel talked about working with Brad.

DF: Brad was great. I think he was like one of those golden retriever type people. Not evil, but dangerous. We were doing the table read for the first time, and Brad showed up wearing a white tank top completely soaked in lighter fluid. He came in saying, “I’M TRYING TO GET THE BARBECUE TO GO!” It was like, whoa! He was from Knoxville and had like that “Jackass” sensibility where you didn’t know what he could do, but I don’t think he ever had a mean bone. His intentions were always nice. If anything, he partied too much, and he once told me that at 12, he made hundreds of thousands of dollars to do “The Client,” and he was getting a lot of his drugs and stuff from family members as a kid. I don’t think he got a fair shot. If anything, the reason why I advocate for younger people in Hollywood or talked about my experiences on this movie which were crazy, I was never speaking from a victim place. I was speaking from a place of advocating for people like Brad who didn’t have anyone saying anything for them. I just think, we’re making art. It doesn’t have to be that crazy. We don’t have to be stealing boats or going nuts on sets to produce good material.

After “Bully,” Daniel went on to appear in many films, but he may still be best remembered for playing high school social outcast Damian in 2004’s “Mean Girls.” Like Joel and myself, I wondered what it was like going from an independent film to a studio movie where everybody is expected to be on their best behavior.

DF: I just don’t think the 2000s will be looked upon as a time where it was easy for people on movie sets. I really don’t. People always ask me all the time how to get their kid in Hollywood, and I say don’t. I waited until I was at least in my 20’s (before going to Hollywood), and that’s the only thing which might have saved me. A lot of our contemporaries are not around with us anymore or are in a crazy state. It was a rough time. I can’t say it was easier or better, but I think it’s better now.

Regardless of the crazy set, Daniel made it clear to the New Beverly audience what the experience of making “Bully” was like, and of how the filmmakers strived to capture the spirit of the true story it is based on.

Bully (2001) Directed by Larry Clark Shown in foreground: Bijou Phillips

DF: On a positive note, though, this movie was awesome. It was so fun to make. Larry was cool, the people I was working with were all like people from Thrasher Magazine, it was just like bad ass people. They did shoot in the real locations; it was the real apartment complexes, and it was the real Pizza Hut (we shot in).

Daniel also made it clear how he was the only local hero for hire in Larry Clark’s “Bully.”

DF: They were scouting locations for the gay clubs, and I was just a young kid just figuring that stuff out and performing at the clubs with people I was in musical theatre with and stuff like that. They were like hey we’re making a movie, and I’m like I’m an actor! I had no idea it was going to turn into this. Carmen Cuba, she discovered a lot of people, and I give her all the credit for plucking me out of obscurity and putting me with these people.

An audience member told Daniel that he was from South Florida, and this led Daniel to talk about when he worked at The Gateway Theater in Fort Lauderdale as a kid. a year later, “Bully” premiered there. Daniel found his road from being an usher to a working actor to be honestly insane.

DF: I was there at the theater going, would you like the popcorn combo? I am a movie lover. I worked at Blockbuster (Video), I worked at movie theaters, that’s all I did. Until I was able to support myself as an actor, I was either an usher in theatre or worked at movie theaters. It (“Bully”) was shot in Fort Lauderdale and the whole crew got their premiere at the movie theater where I worked at. So, whoever served me popcorn today, keep writing your scripts.

Like many, Daniel Franzese considers New Beverly Cinema to be one of his favorite places in Los Angeles, and that it was extra special for him to see “Bully” being screened there on 35-millimeter film. To see films presented there in their original format, something often not available to movie buffs in most places, means a lot to him.

Edward Burns on Portraying a Dedicated Cop in ‘Alex Cross’

Posted on by The Ultimate Rabbit

Actor and filmmaker Edward Burns comes from a family of cops, and he always relishes the opportunity to play one in a movie. In “Alex Cross,” he got to portray Detective Tommy Kane who is partner and childhood friend to Dr. Cross (played here by Tyler Perry), and the boyfriend of Detective Monica Ashe (Rachel Nichols). While at the movie’s press conference which took place at the Four Seasons Hotel in Beverly Hills back in 2012, he talked about what drew him to the role.

Burns said he was aware of James Patterson’s Alex Cross books and that he had read a few of them. The character he plays, however, is not actually in any of Patterson’s books and was an original creation for this movie. He ended up getting a call from the movie’s director, Rob Cohen, who was determined to make this particular Cross film more of an action picture than a police procedural.

Edward Burns: Rob told me that he wanted to develop this new character opposite Alex that’s sort of a best friend. He said we’ll be working on this script up until we shoot and that he’d love to have some input from me. Anytime a filmmaker says they want you to collaborate with them that gets an actor excited, so I jumped in.

When it came to establishing the relationship between Tommy and Alex, Burns said there are two scenes in the movie that give viewers insight as to when these two met and how their relationship has evolved over the years.

Edward Burns: The thinking was we became friends as kids, and when we were little, I was a little more of the protector of him. When we got older, bigger and smarter, he then became the guy that looked after me. That’s what the tone of the relationship is between these characters in the film, and in our last scene together in the car we reminisce about how our roles have changed over time.

For Burns the one fun thing about playing cops in movies is that there’s always that period of when you have to do tactical police training.

Edward Burns: We had a great time working with the guys from the Detroit SWAT team and police department, and that’s always a lot of fun. It’s amazing because you always have to keep relearning that stuff (sweeping a room and proper weapons procedure).

Some actors hate being typecast as cops, but Edward Burns appears to be happy to play as many of them as he can. We look forward to him playing as many more cops in the future, and we applaud him on his continued dedication to the realm of independent film.

“Alex Cross” is now available to own and rent on physical media and digital.

WRITER’S NOTE: This interview took place back in 2012 and may contain outdated information.

Click here to check out my exclusive interview with Edward Burns on “Alex Cross” which I did for We Got This Covered.

‘Megalopolis’ – A Beautiful Mess, and I Liked It

Posted on by The Ultimate Rabbit

So, help me, I liked “Megalopolis.” Francis Ford Coppola’s passion project which has been decades in the making. It was finally unleashed unto the world at large, and the reviews have been incredibly polarizing as audiences were either enthralled or baffled by what they witnessed. it was pretty much considered a box office bomb in advance as studios had no idea of how to promote it, and it debuted with a terrible $4 million gross which looks horrid for a film with a $120 million budget. But while it has been met with the same critical and commercial derision as another Coppola film, “One From The Heart,” was greeted with back in 1982, it shows he has no fear or shame in taking grandiose risks with the material given to him.

Going into “Megalopolis,” I was determined to watch it with as open a mind as possible. Judging from the many Hollywood studios’ collective refusal to promote or market it, I assumed this would be a genre defying motion picture since no executive had a clear idea of how to sell it. I also did not go in expecting something along the lines of “The Godfather” or “Apocalypse Now.” Those classic films were their own things, and this one is quite another.

What I discovered was a cinematic mess, but it’s an enthralling mess with many ideas on its mind and beautiful visuals few other filmmakers could pull off. Seeing it with an audience, some of which did walk out on it, made it all the more entertaining as everyone really got into it, for better or worse. Like Richard Kelly’s “Southland Tales,” I really dug the heedless ambition Coppola brought to this long gestating project, but “Megalopolis” is a bit better as the story is a little more understandable and easier to get the gist of.

The film, which is described as a fable, is set in an alternate version of America where New York City has been rechristened as New Rome. Crime is terrible and poverty is rampant while the rich revel in their decadent desires. Then along comes Cesar Catalina (Adam Driver), a futuristic architect whose invention of the Megalon, a new bio-adaptive building material, offers a great change to the world. His plan is to use it to build a futuristic utopian city of his design. He also has the ability to stop time in its track, which gives no meaning to the term, “time stops for no one.”

But, as Nick Nolte once said at a press conference I attended, “there will always be change and there will always be resistance to change.” The resistance comes from corrupt New Rome Mayor Franklyn Cicero (Giancarlo Esposito) who prefers to keep the status quo the same as it ever was where the rich get richer, and the poor get poorer and like the average New York mayor, Cicero is constantly booed by the citizens he zealously yields power over. Even as the crowds jeer him, he still smiles that big smile of his which makes me wonder if he is ignorant, hopelessly naïve, or just a narcissist.

Now I am sure you guessed it already, but the Roman names are intentional as Coppola is comparing the fall of Rome to what America is going through, and he was influenced by the Catilinarian conspiracy when he wrote the screenplay. That conspiracy involved a coup back in 65 BC when Lucius Sergius Catilina attempted to overthrow the Roman consuls of Marcus Tullius Cicero and Gaius Antonius Hybrida, and forcibly assume control of the state. it is clear both Catalina and Cicero want a measure of power over the citizens of New Rome, and neither will let anything stand in their way in obtaining it.

Another character making a play for political power is Clodio Pulcher (Shia LaBeouf who is especially lively here), Catilina’s resentful cousin who looks to embarrass him in the most unforgettable ways possible. He looks to win the New Rome citizens over by starting a campaign which invites comparisons to the term “Make America Great Again.”

There is a lot more I can tell you about “Megalopolis’” story, but there is honestly enough for several movies here. As a result, watching it once is not nearly enough for me. There are a lot of plot threads which go in various directions, and while some may say this film does not have enough of a center, I think it does. Perhaps it will take some time to put all the pieces together when it comes to this passion project. Or, if Coppola lives long enough, we will get another cut of the film as he likes to fiddle around with his previous works.

Some have expressed fierce criticism over how the actors seem to be acting in different movies here as the performances range from natural to utterly theatrical. Indeed, there are a various number of acting styles clashing with one another here, but I was not really bothered by this. Considering how divided America has become in the past decade or so. We have citizens accepting one reality while others are accepting its polar opposite. As a result, the conflicting styles this motion picture has to offer us made a lot of sense to me.

Adam Driver makes Catilina into an especially compelling character like he always does, Jon Voight does some of his best work in a while as Catalina’s wealthy uncle, Crassus, who has more tricks up his sleeves than the actor would ever be quick to let on. Nathalie Emmanuel, who plays Julia Cicero, Catalina’s love interest and Cicero’s daughter, and does a great job of further emphasizing the intense conflict between the two men.

But if there is a most valuable player to be found in “Megalopolis.” It is Aubrey Plaza who portrays Wow Platinum, a television personality who goes from being Catalina’s mistress to Crassus’ lover and wife as she desires nothing more than money and power, and it becomes crystal clear what she will do to get them. Plaza is given free rein to chew the scenery every which way she likes. there is no forgetting her presence once you walk out of the theater as she revels in portraying such a despicable Lady Macbeth-like character.

What else can I say about “Megalopolis” that I haven’t already? Yes, it is a mess full of ideas which Coppola has spread all over the place, and there are flaws which are quite glaring. Still, it is an infinitely creative piece of work. The visual effects serve the material without overwhelming it, and there is an unforgettable beauty in the color scheme Coppola employs here.

I have no shame in giving “Megalopolis” a positive review. No, it is not Francis Ford Coppola’s masterpiece (for me, that would be “The Conversation”), but it was great fun seeing the famed filmmaker and winemaker swinging for the stars. He walks a tightrope throughout, taking risks and challenges along which most directors would never do today.

“Megalopolis” is very, very earnest in its designs as Coppola leaves us with a plea for peace and a world which everyone regardless of class and creed can fully benefit from. This may seem like a pipe dream considering how the world is currently tearing itself apart due to religious or ideological differences, but it is a memorable epitaph, should this film be his final work.

And at the very least, we will always have Adam Driver’s unforgettable delivery of “da club.”

* * * ½ out of * * * *

Underseen Movie: ‘Thanks for Sharing’

Posted on by The Ultimate Rabbit

WRITER’S NOTE: This review was written back in 2012, and I was reminded of this film when I recently interviewed the writer/director and stars of the 2024 film “Sweet Dreams.”

There are many who see support groups (or 12-step groups if you want to call them that). The truth, however, is that those who attend them are not any different from the rest of us, and they can at times be very funny. At the very least, these people deserve credit and applause for taking the time to get the help they need because asking for help is usually one of the hardest things to do.

“Thanks for Sharing” is one of the few movies I have seen which deals with these groups and the people who attend them. While it does take the subject of addiction seriously, it also finds a good balance between drama and comedy to where we find ourselves laughing with these characters and never at them.

This movie focuses on three men who attend the same Sex Addicts Anonymous meeting: Adam (Mark Ruffalo), Mike (Tim Robbins) and Neil (Josh Gad). Adam is an over-achieving environmental consultant who is celebrating his fifth year of sobriety. Mike is a happily married man who is kind of the elder statesman of the support group these men attend. And then there’s Neil, an emergency room doctor who is in serious denial over his addictions to where he gets in serious trouble with the law. I like how we are given characters who are at different stages of dealing with this addiction to where it gives you a good idea of why people come to these groups in the first place.

Adam is at a good place as he has really cleaned up his act and is coping with life really well. He takes great pains to keep himself on the right track by taking such measures as removing television sets from his hotel rooms so he won’t find himself watching anything pornographic. But then he meets the irresistibly beautiful Phoebe (Gwyneth Paltrow) while at a party where people are eating bugs (don’t ask), and the two are instantly attracted to one another. While Adam is eager to be in a relationship with her, he is not altogether sure he is ready to fall in love again after all he has accomplished. He is trying to keep his demons at bay, but it becomes much harder for him to do so.

Mike has been in recovery the longest, and he appears to have a great relationship with his wife, Katie (Joely Richardson). Things between them, however, change very quickly when his son Danny (Patrick Fugit) turns out to have some serious addiction problems of his own. Katie is thrilled to see Danny, but Mike is not sure he can trust him after all they have been through. In the process, we come to see that Mike, despite his well-earned sobriety, still has some major control issues he has yet to make peace with.

As for Neil, he has gotten himself into a painful situation when he stands uncomfortably close to a very attractive woman while riding on the subway. From there, things come to a head for him when he loses his job under embarrassing circumstances, and this finally makes him realize he needs help. Neil eventually finds solace through another recovering addict, Dede (Alecia Moore, better known as Pink), who is just starting to deal with her personal demons as well.

I am always yearning for movies which have down to earth characters, and “Thanks for Sharing” is definitely one of them. All of what everyone goes through feels very real, and nothing ever felt contrived to me. Granted, the storyline involving Robbins’ character is one we have seen many times before, but the acting between him, Fugit and Richardson are so good to where we can forgive the filmmakers for venturing into familiar territory. It really is a shame how most Hollywood movies do not dare give us more characters we can relate to on a human level. If they did, it would make most movies far more enjoyable and invigorating as a result.

“Thanks for Sharing” was directed and co-written by Stuart Blumberg, one of the writers of “The Kids Are All Right.” Finding a balance between comedy and drama can be very hard to pull off, but Blumberg is successful in doing so for the most part. He also shows a lot of love for each character here, and not just the ones who in recovery.

Mark Ruffalo remains one of the best and most naturalistic actors working today. As Adam, I never caught him acting once, and his chemistry with Paltrow is very strong. Ruffalo makes Adam a very likable guy as he struggles to not fall back into his old habits, and he makes you see how much of a challenge this is for him.

As for Paltrow, this is the most relaxed she has been onscreen in some time. While she was a blast to watch in “Iron Man 3,” she seems more in her element here as she portrays a character who is not an addict, but one who needs to face up to the issues slowly eating away at her. Watching her in “Thanks for Sharing” reminded me of just how wonderful she can be when she is given the right role.

Robbins remains as terrific an actor as ever, and I am always enthralled when I watch him in anything he does. His character of Mike seems like the typical father who has lost trust with those he should be the closest to, but he imbues this character with a lot of humanity to where he never seems like a simple caricature. His scenes with Fugit, who we have not seen enough of since “Almost Famous,” feel emotionally true, and their relationship feels authentic when it could have come across as ridiculously manipulative.

At this point, I am not familiar with Gad’s work other than him appearing in the acclaimed musical “The Book of Mormon.” Gad has the trickiest role here as he is this movie’s comic relief, but he never plays Neil for simple laughs. We are watching Neil as he is at the start of his recovery, and it isa rough start to say the least. Gad makes you root for Neil even as he does some of the dumbest and most reckless things anyone would ever have the nerve to do.

But there is no forgetting Alecia Moore, a.k.a. Pink, who gives an impressive performance as an addict who was pushed into this particular support group by a friend. Her character of Dede ends up forming a strong rapport with Neil, and they find in each other the strength they need to move past what is destroying their lives to where they can see the light at the end of the tunnel. From start to finish, she really understands this character very well, and I could see it in her eyes. Like Ruffalo, you never catch her acting here as she grounds her character in a reality which is not all removed from our own.

I liked how “Thanks for Sharing” showed how these support groups can become another addiction as its members begin to spend more time with others instead of their own families. While these characters have made great strides in conquering their demons, they still struggle with their urges every single day. Truth be told, it takes a lot of courage to face up to the things which are tearing your life apart, and long before this movie is over, you realize these addicts are not weak but strong.

The one thing I would have liked to see more of is how the family members deal with their loved ones’ addictions. My understanding is that they can only be so involved in what an addict goes through as they can never fully comprehend how dangerous their addictions can be unless they have experienced the same thing themselves. There is a scene between Paltrow and Richardson which addresses this divide, but I would have liked to see this movie go a little bit deeper in this area.

But when all is said and done, “Thanks for Sharing” fulfilled my need to see a motion picture with characters which we can recognize in our own lives. With all these superhero movies coming at us endlessly, it is important to remember we will never be perfect and cannot be everybody’s everything. It would be nice to be a superhero though, wouldn’t it? Lord knows we could use a couple of them right now. Anyway, I think this movie is definitely worth checking out.

* * * ½ out of * * * *

Richard Gere on Making Us Root for the Bad Guy in ‘Arbitrage’

Posted on by The Ultimate Rabbit

Photography By Myles Aronowitz

WRITER’S NOTE: This article was originally written in 2012.

Don’t get me wrong, Richard Gere has played many likable characters in movies like “Pretty Woman” and “An Officer and a Gentleman,” but it’s when he plays despicable ones that he truly excels as an actor. The latest example of this is his brilliant performance as Robert Miller in “Arbitrage,” the movie which marks the directorial debut of writer Nicholas Jarecki. Robert is a hedge fund magnate who is desperately trying to cover up his instances of fraud, cheats on his wife, and willfully deceives his children. On paper this character is a jerk, but the beauty of Gere’s performance is how he keeps us rooting for him regardless of this fact.

So, how does Gere manage to make such an unlikable person so fascinating and relatable on screen? Audie Cornish of NPR’s “All Things Considered” asked him this question as she couldn’t get past the fact that Robert Miller is a “monster” and yet still wanted him to get away with what he did.

“Isn’t that funny? I mean, that’s one of the uniform things and kind of mystifying things,” Gere said. “And the comments I’ve gotten back, even from very close friends, that they’re very angry with me, that they care about this guy and want him to get out of trouble, although they’re well aware the guy is a jerk, as you say, and makes some very bad decisions in his life and has a kind of a mindset that you go, huh?”

“But look, that’s my job, is to make characters human, to make them knowable on some level,” Gere continued. “I think it had root in when you spend time with even supposed monsters, there’s a human being there. And in storytelling, you’ve got to find that human being.”

This humanity certainly shows up in the scene between Robert and his daughter, Brooke (played by Brit Marling), where he has to break her heart by telling her the truth of his fraudulent activities. What he is doing to her is terrible, and yet you still feel for him as he tries to explain how his business really works. Regardless of all the bad things Robert has done, there’s no doubt as to just how much he loves his family.

“That was a scene we (Gere and Marling) worked on a lot, and in the end, it came out of an improvisation actually, that she’s not my partner, that she works for me,” Gere said. “And I found myself almost in an animal growl saying everyone works for me. And I think that was the truest moment with this character, that that’s his mentality – horrifying but true. I mean, he’s naked in that moment.”

Another great scene in “Arbitrage” has Robert to do the right thing only to see him look for another way out. Being the reckless gambler that Robert is, he always seems to find another angle which can keep him up and running for yet another day. Gere remarked about how his sister, who is a psychiatrist, found this moment in the film especially fascinating.

“That mentality of I’m always going to find a way out, always find a way out. I think it’s that kind of a gambler’s thing,” Gere said. “Well, I’m down to my last penny, but I’m going to turn that penny into two pennies, and I’m going to get out of this. It’s a really interesting kind of person that never truly gives in. Now, if you’d imagine they were in the service of something extraordinary on the planet, what they could achieve, I guess the hope for me is, is that the people who are so effective in the world and can do this stuff, which is just ultimately pretty silly, just the accumulation of wealth, if they were putting their minds and their talents and their skill towards being of service and responsible on this planet, man, this will be a garden.”

Whether or not he is playing good or bad guys, Richard Gere always comes across in his performances as someone we want to support. Regardless of whether he plays a self-serving defense attorney in “Primal Fear” or “Chicago” or portraying an infinitely corrupt cop in “Internal Affairs,” there is something about this actor which is always alluring. Just don’t expect him to explain what it is because even he’s not sure:

“I don’t know. I don’t know what that is. I suppose it’s some peculiar thing I’m able to do. I don’t know. It’s certainly nothing I work at or particularly aware of in the process.”

Perhaps it’s best he does not find out because we want to see him giving more great performances like this one in the near future.

SOURCE:

Audie Cornish, “Richard Gere on Playing a Jerk You Want to Root For,” All Things Considered, NPR, September 14, 2012.

All-Time Favorite Trailers: ‘The Expendables 3’

Posted on by The Ultimate Rabbit

With “The Expendables 4,” or “Expend4bles” as the studio cleverly calls it, about to be released, I wanted to reflect on its predecessor which came out nearly a decade ago. As disappointed as I was with “The Expendables 3” to where my opinion would be no different if it were rated R instead of PG-13, I still adore its teaser trailer which I still find myself watching quite often. It is short and sweet as we are introduced to the cast of the sequel to the tune of Malcolm Arnold’s theme to “The Bridge on the River Kwai.” There is something thrilling about seeing all these actors and movie stars coming together on the silver screen to this famous piece of film music, the same one the actors of “The Breakfast Club” whistled at one point while losing an entire Saturday for whatever it was they did wrong.

Like the teaser trailer for “Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen,” this is a great one for a movie I really cannot stand. While I am happy to revisit “The Expendables” and “The Expendables 2,” “The Expendables 3” is one I would prefer to believe never existed in the first place. But yes, we always have this delightful teaser trailer to it.

Check out the teaser trailer below.

‘The Expendables 3’ – A Franchise Killer

Posted on by The Ultimate Rabbit

WRITER’S NOTE: This review was written in 2014.

I was really looking forward to the third “Expendables” movie ever since I saw the teaser trailer which was scored to the theme for “Bridge on the River Kwai.” None of the films in this franchise will ever be mistaken for high art, but they bring about a much-needed nostalgia workout which many of us have for the action movies from the 1980’s. Watching “The Expendables 3,” however, reminded me of how the third movie in a franchise is where everything falls apart due to a reliance on formula and clichés which don’t work the way they used to. While I have a hard time saying how the actors look tired here (and that’s because they don’t), the story gets boring quickly, the dialogue is cruddy and not even the action sequences could lift me out of my utter frustration with something that is not nostalgic enough nor exhilarating or adrenaline-pumping in the slightest.

“The Expendables 3” starts off with the team rescuing one of its long-lost members, Doctor Death (Wesley Snipes), from being sent to a military prison. The scene where he’s being rescued is cool, but the thrill we get from watching it feels a bit muted, and this becomes a sign that everything else following the movie’s opening will be equally exhilarating, which is to say not at all. Either that, or “The Raid 2” truly spoiled me to where no other action film being released these days can come even remotely close to that sequel’s brilliance.

After rescuing Doctor Death, the team heads off to Somalia to intercept a shipment of bombs being sent to a warlord, of course. In the process, they come face to face with former member and Expendables co-founder Conrad Stonebanks (Mel Gibson) who had betrayed the team by profiting off of illegal weapons dealings. When he shoots Hale Caesar (Terry Crews) to where he is left in a precarious medical state, Barney Ross (Sylvester Stallone) gets all shaken up and decides to disband the veteran members of the Expendables as he feels they have all run their course, and they should all get out while they still have a pulse.

When Barney does this, I knew this sequel was going to be in serious trouble. Barney ends up recruiting a whole bunch of younger Expendables with the help of retired mercenary Bonaparte (Kelsey Grammer), but I knew from there that those “old guys” will eventually return to help save the day. Stallone, who has always been the major creative force behind the “Expendables” movies, always writes screenplays where the main character suffers a personal tragedy and seeks redemption in order to right what he did wrong, and he’s basically been writing the same damn screenplay since the original “Rocky.” Frankly, I think it’s time Stallone opens his eyes to see how this storyline is now as old as the Declaration of Independence.

Look, I don’t care how old Jason Statham, Wesley Snipes, Randy Couture and Dolph Lundgren are because they can all still kick ass after all these years, but putting them all on the back burner for this entry proves to be very foolish. You know that Barney will eventually realize he needs their help, and the movie takes way too long for him to reach this conclusion. Instead, it wastes a lot of time introducing us to a new generation of Expendables, and most of them are inescapably tame to where it’s easy to understand why this sequel got a PG-13 rating instead of an R.

Kellan Lutz ends up showing the same range as an actor that he showed earlier in the horrifically bad “The Legend of Hercules,” and that is not a compliment. As for Glen Powell and Victor Ortiz, they don’t leave much of an impression here. Things fare much better though for Ronda Rousey who plays the highly athletic nightclub bouncer, Luna. Don’t even ask if she holds her own with the male action stars because you can quickly tell she can even before she starts kicking ass. While her co-stars won’t linger in the mind long after you’ve endured “The Expendables 3,” Rousey makes you eager to see a female version of this franchise sooner rather than later.

Antonio Banderas shows up as Galgo, the soldier who won’t shut up. It’s like he’s doing a version of his “Puss in Boots” character on acid, and it’s a kick to see how much energy the Spanish actor still has at his age. Harrison Ford is also on board as Max Drummer, the CIA dude who manages the Expendables. It’s fun seeing Ford join the party, but it doesn’t take long to see that he is playing the same character Bruce Willis played in the last two films. All the writers have done here is change the name to protect the greedy “Die Hard” movie star.

Granted, there are some nice in-jokes throughout “The Expendables 3” which show the cast having a good sense of humor about themselves. I have to give Snipes credit as even he pokes fun at his felonious past, and there’s a nice line of dialogue regarding Willis’ disappearance from the franchise. But while the cast is clearly having fun, that fun never translates over to the audience. On top of being saddled with a weak story and crappy dialogue, this sequel makes you feel like you are a guest at a party where you’re not really party to the party.

Looking back, this movie could have used a lot more of Schwarzenegger in it as he proves to be the one who gives us all the 1980’s action nostalgia we could ever possibly want. Seeing him spout off classic one-liners from “Predator” provided me with the most enjoyable moments this misbegotten sequel had to offer. Indeed, he’s always had a good sense of humor about himself and is always determined to give audiences what they want. To see him reduced to a series of cameos here does “The Expendables 3” a major disservice.

Actually, the best and most enjoyable performance here is, in my humble opinion, Mel Gibson’s who plays the ruthless arms dealer Conrad Stonebanks. Playing a crazed villain has become the kind of role Gibson typically plays these days, and this is one of the most gleefully psychotic bad guys he has played thus far. That crazy energy he displayed in the “Mad Max” and “Lethal Weapon” movies is put to great use here, and he makes Conrad the kind of bad guy we seriously love to hate.

“The Expendables” movies have been about reviving the old days of 1980’s action flicks, but this third entry misses the whole point about what made them so much fun; even with the thinnest of plots, they were about something. “The Expendables 3” feels like it barely exists, and I came out of the theater feeling empty and depressed. Those 1980’s action classics always got my adrenaline pumping, but this one almost put me to sleep despite an especially loud climax. After two fun action movies which made me nostalgic for what I grew up on cinematically, here we have with a sequel which reminded us of why so many in this genre suck nowadays.

“The Expendables 3” was directed by Patrick Hughes, an Australian filmmaker who is said to be helming the American remake of “The Raid: Redemption.” Now it is bad enough anyone is remaking that infinitely awesome flick, but I hope he has better luck with that one than he did with this lousy sequel.

* ½ out of * * * *

‘The Expendables 2’ – More Fun Than Its Predecessor

Posted on by The Ultimate Rabbit

WRITER’S NOTE: This review was written in 2012.

“The Expendables 2” is the kind of dumb action movie fun we have come to expect from the likes of Sylvester Stallone, Arnold Schwarzenegger and Bruce Willis among others famous in this particular genre. Clearly everyone involved in its making was simply out to give action fans what they want, and while there are no real surprises in store, it is still fun for those who just want to enjoy the R-rated carnage being inflicted onscreen without analyzing this sequel’s threadbare plot. It’s also nice to see a lot of these action movie icons come together in the same film, and it helps to make “The Expendables 2” more memorable than its predecessor.

This sequel opens like gangbusters as the Expendables blast their way through a village to rescue someone who looks rather familiar (I’ll leave it to you to find out who it is). Those who survived the first movie, or proved to be nowhere as expendable as the film’s title suggested, are back, and seeing them lay waste to a foreign army made me wonder if these were the soldiers John Rambo forgot to eviscerate in “Rambo.”

Afterwards, Barney Ross (Sylvester Stallone) is greeted by the secretive Mr. Church (Bruce Willis) who gives Ross a mission he is in no position to turn down; recover an electronic device that can help retrieve a dangerous substance which cannot fall into enemy hands. It turns out that this substance is plutonium, and the gang is met by an especially villainous character appropriately named Jean Vilain (Jean-Claude Van Damme) who plans to sell it to the highest weapons making bidder. This leads to the Expendables losing one of its members in unforgivably cold-blooded fashion, and that ends up making this particular mission especially personal.

Stallone once again has the lead role and co-wrote the script, but he has turned the directing duties over to Simon West, the filmmaker responsible for “Lara Croft: Tomb Raider,” “The General’s Daughter” starring John Travolta, some remakes which vary in degrees of quality (“When A Stranger Calls” and “The Mechanic”), and perhaps the best Jerry Bruckheimer guilty pleasure to date, “Con Air.” While I have no problem defending Stallone as a director, having West take over proved to be a good move. The action scenes are more cohesive, the editing is not all over the place, and everything we see onscreen remains appropriately LOUD.

By the way, those who complain about how loud “The Expendables 2” is, just shut up. All the action movies released in summer 2012 are just as loud, so we should expect the increase in volume by now. Next time bring yourself some ear plugs if you want to preserve what’s left of your hearing!

Now Stallone and Schwarzenegger are definitely showing their age here (Schwarzenegger especially), but it is great to see them still kicking ass even as they have long since become senior citizens. In an industry which continues to be increasingly youth-based, these action movie veterans prove the odds against them are more expendable than they are. Seeing Schwarzenegger handle a machine gun is especially fulfilling as it shows he has not lost aim after getting caught up in the realm of politics as Governor of California.

Jason Statham, who returns as knife specialist Lee Christmas, almost looks like a kid compared to the rest of the cast. Liam Hemsworth, who portrays former military sniper Billy the Kid, practically resembles an infant next to Stallone which probably makes the majority of the cast feel jealous as a result, and Terry Crews still knows how to rock a nasty looking gun as weapons specialist Hale Caesar (nice name). Randy Couture returns as demolitions expert Toll Road, but he does not much to do here. The same goes for Jet Li who plays combat expert Yin Yang as he ends up disappearing from this sequel far sooner than I would have anticipated. As for Dolph Lundgren, who reprises his character of the volatile Gunner Jensen, he actually grew on me a bit this time around.

There are some “new” cast members who team up with the Expendables this time, and they prove to be welcome additions. Nan Yu adds that needed touch of estrogen to this testosterone dominated franchise as Maggie, a CIA agent who provides some of this sequel’s few surprises as she proves to be an expert in more ways than one. The previously mentioned Liam Hemsworth gives “The Expendables 2” that youthful feel of someone who has yet to become as cynical as his hard-bitten colleagues, and he gives a strong performance as a soldier eager to steer his destiny in a new direction.

One action star, however, who I was happy to see here was Chuck Norris who portrays a “lone wolf” retired military operative named Booker, an homage to the character he played in “Good Guys Wear Black.” Now while I can’t agree with Norris’ political beliefs in real life, seeing him appear onscreen had me applauding. Norris has always had a strong and memorable presence in the movies I have seen him in, and he has one of this movie’s best lines regarding a snake.

But one actor I actually had more fun watching than I thought I would in “The Expendables 2” was Jean-Claude Van Damme. His limited acting skills prove to be a perfect fit for this sequel’s main villain, and he creates a perfectly detestable bad guy we want to see Stallone and company beat the crap out of. Now while he may be one of my dad’s favorite actors (just kidding), I have never cared much for him in movies other than “Hard Target” or “JCVD.” But here, Van Damme proves he still has those graceful moves as he dares his opponents to take him out minus the use of guns.

I guess I could complain more about “The Expendables 2” as it likely has more plot holes than anyone would notice upon first glance. But hey, in the end this is a movie which should be fun, and for me it was. I enjoyed seeing these action stalwarts come together in one place, and seeing them interact made for some exciting and funny moments. This sequel may not reach the exhilarating action movie heights of this year’s “The Dark Knight Rises” or even “The Raid: Redemption,” but it does get the job done. With something like this, that is usually the best you can hope for.

* * * out of * * * *

‘The Expendables’ – The ‘Ocean’s Eleven’ of Action Movie Extravaganzas

Posted on by The Ultimate Rabbit

WRITER’S NOTE: This review was written back in 2010. It has since been upgraded to eliminate typos and run-on sentences which never should have existed in the first place.

Sylvester Stallone continues his cinematic time travel to the testosterone driven action extravaganzas made famous in the 1980’s with “The Expendables,” a film you can easily describe as the “Ocean’s Eleven” of action films with its cast of movie stars and martial artists you never would have expected to see together on the silver screen. After previously revisiting his iconic characters of Rocky Balboa and John Rambo, Stallone stars and directs this film which is a combination of “The Dirty Dozen” with a little bit of “The Delta Force” thrown in for good measure as we are bombarded with gunfights, explosions and everything else these movies had to offer. The morally conflicted heroes or superheroes currently dominating cinemas today are nowhere to be found here as this film’s mission is to simply give the audience an action-packed adrenaline ide with the good guys defeating the bad guys.

The plot here is paper thin to where I wondered if “The Expendables” had one at all. It involves a team of mercenaries led by Barney Ross (Stallone) who gets his team together for a mission which involves overthrowing a brutal dictator (is there any other kind?) in South America named General Garza (David Zayas). Things, however, get complicated as they always do when the team discovers Garza is in co-hoots with ex-CIA agent James Munroe (Eric Roberts) who is determined to keep Garza on a tight leash while controlling Garza’s biggest business, drug trafficking. The team eventually realizes this was all a set up by the CIA to take out both Garza and Munroe as the agency wouldn’t be able to do it without serious consequences, hence the title of the movie. These elite mercenaries are the best at what they do, and they have no connections to senior military officials. They get killed off, and the CIA can comfortably deny their involvement, just like the Impossible Mission Force.

Stallone makes it clear from the start that he is running the show here as he is said to control every aspect of every movie he appears in, even if he is not the director. He has been dealt so many career setbacks over the years to where it is truly astonishing he has not been forever relegated to the straight to video realm alongside Steven Seagal. While “Daylight” and “Driven” looked to be the final nails driven into his movie star coffin, new generations keep discovering those movies which brought him stardom, and he is still quite the box office draw overseas. “The Expendables” is not necessarily going to be remembered for his performance which is adequate here, but it is nice to see him let loose after the intensity of “Rambo.”

Jason Statham co-stars as Ross’ right-hand man, Lee Christmas, and he gets to kick ass here without having to look all prim and proper like he did in those “Transporter” movies. Lee is always fast on his feet and super quick with a blade, but if only he could work out his relationship with that woman he left behind. Statham is one of best actors in “The Expendables,” and he holds his own throughout each scene opposite the veteran movie stars. Moreover, he is the one to have on your side if your boyfriend is foolish enough to hit you in the face.

We also have Jet Li on board as Yin Yang who quickly becomes the butt of jokes over his diminutive height, which is of course a setup for the ass kicking we know he will eventually be doing. Terry Crews, as Hale Caesar, sports a huge ego which is soon outdone by his massive automatic shotgun which results in some of the film’s most graphic moments that will have audience members going, “OUCH!”

Dolph Lundgren temporarily escapes his direct to DVD career here as Gunner Jensen, and it’s nice to see him in a film which gives him more dialogue than usual. Right from the start, you know he won’t go from here in pieces.

While Eric Roberts has never fully escaped the shadow which enveloped his career after playing Paul Snyder in “Star 80,” he still creates slimy villains like very few others can today. His villainous character may seem one-dimensional on the page, but the actor makes him a charismatic one and the kind we love to hate.

The brutal dictator is the typical kind you find in movies like these, and David Zayas does good work here even though he is only given so much to do. Some of you may remember Zayas as Enrique Morales from “OZ,” and I wish Stallone allowed the actor to bring that same energy to General Garza. Watching him on “OZ” was electric because he could come across as quite frightening without having to raise his voice any, and I was hoping he could have had more of Morales’ impact here.

And let us not forget the scene where the original Planet Hollywood trio comes together in a manner which does not involve bankrupt restaurant chains. Seeing Stallone onscreen with Bruce Willis and Arnold Schwarzenegger feels long overdue and, if nothing else, shows how each of them has a good sense of humor about themselves and their Hollywood images. This is especially the case with Schwarzenegger, and you will see why.

Overall, “The Expendables” is definitely a fun time at the movies, but I came out of it feeling like it could have been better. It is also a victim of Jason Bourne franchise editing style as the camera is flying all over the place, and the editing is so lightning quick to where you cannot always tell what is going on. There are a number of cool action sequences though where the adrenaline really kicks in, and characters of all kinds get eviscerated in memorably painful ways. As for the acting, it is good for the most part, but some actors remind of us more of what they were originally famous for, and how none of it had to do with classical actor training.

Actually, one actor I really have to give props to here is Mickey Rourke who made the other of all acting comebacks in “The Wrestler,” and recently stole scenes from Robert Downey Jr. in “Iron Man 2.” As Tool, a former teammate of this mercenary team who now spends his days doing tattoos for his buddies, he has a speech where his character talks about when he was in Bosnia where he witnessed a woman taking her own life. Tool could have kept it from happening, but he did not. This is one of those typical “buy back my soul” moments we see all the time, and I bet it looked flat on paper, but Rourke plays the hell out it and delivers this film’s most emotionally powerful moment.

So, it looks like the tagline for “The A-Team” movie was very wrong indeed; there is a plan B after all! Granted, “The A-Team” movie was more fun, but “The Expendables” has plenty of excellent moments which makes it worth the long wait. Plus, in a time where movies are very anti-mercenary, this is a unique example of where they can work as action movie heroes.

Now we have the inevitable sequel to look forward to, and you know there’s gonna be one. The big question is, what other 1980’s and 1990’s action stars will join Stallone and company on the next go around? Some of these cast members will clearly not be returning, so there are job openings. Jean Claude Van Damme, Steven Seagal and even Kurt Russell turned down roles in “The Expendables” for different reasons. But with this film being a hit, you know they will express interest in climbing aboard for the follow up.

* * * out of * * * *

‘John Wick Chapter 4’ – Still Trying to Kill the Unkillable

Posted on by The Ultimate Rabbit

If there is to be a fifth “John Wick” film in our future, or perhaps this can be included in the upcoming spinoff entitled “Ballerina,” in which a father and son visit a memorial which stretches out for a couple of miles. Their dialogue would be comprised of the following:

“Daddy, what is the wall?”

“Well son, this is a memorial for all the people killed by John Wick, a professional hitman and assassin.”

“Wow, there are so many names up there!”

“I know son. Funny thing is, this memorial was opened up the public before those who constructed it realized they had another mile or two to add on. Just when everyone thought John could not kill another soul, he somehow found the strength to kill another human who was sent out to kill him.”

“Why did so many try to kill him dad?”

“Because there was a bounty on his head son, one to the tune of around $20 million dollars.”

“Daddy, are all these names up here to show they did not die in vain?”

“Actually son, it was quite the opposite. This memorial is proof of what happens when you put greed above everything else.”

Right from the start, the “John Wick” movies have shown how its title character is a human being somewhere in between the 1980’s action heroes portrayed by Arnold Schwarzenegger and Sylvester Stallone, and John McClane from “Die Hard.” On one hand, John looks to be super-human as he dishes out punishment while taking quite a large number of brutal hits in return, but thanks to Keanu Reeves, who continues to do some of his best work in these films, this character remains fully human as he is not without a soul and is looking to find peace in a world which appears very much devoid of it, particularly for him.

“John Wick Chapter 4” starts not too long after the events of “John Wick Chapter 3: Parabellum” in which he found himself betrayed by the High Table. Since then, he has lived in an underground bunker with The Bowery King (Laurence Fishburne) who has helped nurse him back to health. Suffice to say, John’s bloody knuckles are a sign that he is ready to fight yet another battle. Of course, what makes this even clearer is the following dialogue:

The Bowery King: “You ready, John?”

John Wick: “Yeah.”

But the fact that John Wick is still alive does not sit well with Marquis Vincent de Gramont (Bill Skarsgard, who always looks like he is about to start singing “I’m Sexy and I Know It”) who chastises Winston Scott (Ian McShane) and his friend Charon (the late Lance Reddick) for failing to kill this dog-loving assassin. To see that the job finally gets done, Marquis hires Caine (Donnie Yen), a blind assassin who also happens to be an old friend of John’s. Caine is not keen on taking the job, and he shudders once he realizes what name he is reading on a braille card to where he does not even need to spell it all out. As these two come to blows, it does not take much to see how they are both victims of circumstances beyond their control as they fight to protect what they love most.

Director Chad Stahelski knows what we want and expect from a “John Wick” film when we enter then theater, but he is smart to not start things off with too big a bang. During its 169-minutes, he takes his time to reintroduce us into the world John inhabits and of the people in his universe who either benefit or suffer from his deadly actions. And when those action scenes suddenly take flight, you can bet it will take not one or two, but close to a dozen bullets to take out a single bad guy. Watching this, it makes me wonder if John will suddenly run out of bullets at the worst possibly moment.

When it comes to Reeves, many love to joke about what a bad actor he is. As for myself, I feel the need to defend him from time to time even if his work in “Knock Knock” remains too painful to endure. The truth is, he is one of the main reasons the “John Wick” movies work as well as they do. In this latest installment, he receives the deepest of bruises, is almost hung from a noose, has a tattoo searingly burned into one of his arms and ends up falling down more flights of concrete stairs than Father Karass did in “The Exorcist,” and yet he still comes out of all of this standing tall. Even if you wonder if John ever gets any sleep, has any time to go to the bathroom or if one ice bath a day is enough for him, Reeves makes you believe he can endure the worst and yet still come out of it all with a pulse. Even when a supporting character utters to John why he doesn’t just die, he makes you realize he is not about to or, at least, not yet.

Other than that, “John Wick Chapter 4” contains a lot of great things such as Ian McShane’s performance as he plays Winston Scott in a far more gleeful than he did previously, Clancy Brown who proves to be a wonderful addition as a high-ranking High Table operative called the Harbinger, a thrillingly propulsive music score composed by Tyler Bates and Joel J. Richard, and striking cinematography from Dan Laustsen.

Still, I do need to single out another performance here, and it is the one from Donnie Yen, As Caine, he shows how the blind can see things better than those who still have their eyesight, so it should be no surprise when he easily takes out his devilish opponents with something like the sound of a doorbell. Like John, Caine is in a position not of his own making, and Yen does an excellent job of showing the painful conflicts this character is forced to deal with. As much as he does not want to be in this position, you know he is not about to go easy on his prey. But will he enjoy taking down his target? That remains to be seen.

While watching “John Wick Chapter Four,” I was reminded of what happened after Ang Lee’s “Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon” became such a worldwide phenomenon. Hollywood quickly greenlit a number of martial arts films heavy stunts, but none of them were anywhere as successful. Some studio executives proclaimed that these films had the best fight choreographers available, but they clearly missed the point. The best action films out there are not just about stunts, but also about characters with moral dilemmas they are constantly entangled in. Whether or not they win the day, they still wonder what will become of them once all the violence ends.

The ”John Wick” films are not just about stunts; they are about the characters which inhabit them. This is what makes all the amazing stunt work, and it is infinitely amazing here, so bloody effective. Whether or not you consider “John Wick Chapter Four” to be one of the best movies ever made, it is clearly one of the greatest action flicks to come out in recent years, and seeing it once is not enough. More importantly, you have got to check it out on the silver screen with the biggest audience in town.

By the way, there is a post credit scene I encourage you to stick around for. And yes, this film is dedicated to the memory of Lance Reddick, yet another actor who tragically left us far too soon. Rest in peace Lance…

* * * * out of * * * *