Showing posts with label comic books. Show all posts
Showing posts with label comic books. Show all posts

7.25.2025

Superman (2025) & The Fantastic Four (1994) w/ The DTV Connoisseur (Episode 220)


In this episode, I joined Matt Poirier of DTVC Podcast as we look at the recent SUPERMAN (2025) movie and 1994's THE FANTASTIC FOUR film.

With the first one, we discuss our feelings about the film overall, then what this may mean for the balance of power between Marvel and DC, and also whether or not "superhero fatigue" is an issue now.

Then with the second film, we get stuck in on this Roger Corman classic (?). What works, what doesn't and how much it differs from comic book movies now.



11.16.2024

Venom: The Last Dance (2024)

DIRECTED BY

Kelly Marcel


STARRING

Tom Hardy - Eddie Brock/Venom

Chiwetel Ejiofor - General Rex Strickland

Juno Temple - Dr. Teddy Payne 

Clark Backo - Sadie Backo

Rhys Ifans - Martin Moon

Stephen Graham - Detective Mulligan

Peggy Lu - Mrs. Chen 


Genre - Action/Adventure/Science Fiction/Aliens/Comic Books


Running Time - 109 Minutes



PLOT

Eddie and Venom are on the run. Hunted by both of their worlds and with the net closing in, the duo are forced into a devastating decision that will bring the curtains down on Venom and Eddie’s last dance. 


REVIEW


PROS

  • Hardy and Hardy. The VENOM films haven’t been the greatest comic book movies ever made, but they’re definitely fun time-wasters and probably the best Sony Spider-Verse films outside of… well, anything Spider-Man. And while VENOM: THE LAST DANCE is my least favorite of the trilogy, at least it remains consistent with one aspect: an engaging dual-performance by Tom Hardy. 


Hardy does seem a bit bored and tired in this installment, but maybe that was intentional considering Eddie Brock has gone through a whole lot in three films. His voicework as Venom remains the highlight, sharing hilarious banter and genuine emotional moments with Eddie Brock. While the trilogy hasn’t been the strongest, it’s a shame that Hardy is stepping away from the franchise because he’s probably the main reason to watch any of these movies. He’s charismatic, can handle action pretty well and just manages to bring a level of gravitas a movie like this doesn’t deserve. Hardy carries the film on his back and is the only real reason to watch this movie.


  • Some of the first act and the entire final act. I’m just gonna be honest - a lot of this movie is a slog to get through. But VENOM 3 starts off where the after credits of 2021’s SPIDER-MAN: NO WAY HOME ends where Eddie is sent out of the MCU and sent back to the Sony universe. Realizing he’s wanted for a crime he didn’t commit [the murder of Detective Mulligan in LET THERE BE CARNAGE], Eddie goes on the run, confronting a number of characters and even an alien threat along the way. The opening where Eddie takes on a gang is fun, due to a cool visual showcase of Venom’s powers. The entire final act is also a whole lot of fun - just a CGI, symbiote action fest where a group of symbiotes possess people and take on an alien threat [and some of the military as well]. I thought the 3rd act was the best part of the film because it felt like a comic book movie for once and there were actual stakes involved. First time director Kelly Marcel handles the scope quite well, even if she can’t maintain the pacing for quieter, character moments in mostly the second act.


  • Knull. The King and Creator of the Symbiotes has finally made his first-time live-action appearance, with Andy Serkis doing the motion capture and voice for, who is apparently, the next great villain in the Spider-Verse. I love the idea of Knull and using a totally new character as the big threat for the Spider-Man characters is a great move. He could be the new Thanos if done right.


CONS

  • Knull. Then again, Knull barely does anything in VENOM 3. He just sits on this throne, sends his army of creatures after Venom and gets upset when things don’t go his way. Considering how well the film is doing at the box office, we’ll probably see more of the guy. Hopefully next time, they actually do something with him and build him up into something super important and threatening. Honestly, Knull felt like an afterthought here.


  • The supporting characters. The first two VENOM movies had characters that, while not the most fleshed out, actually elevate the material and flesh out Eddie Brock’s world. Anne, Cletus Kasady, Detective Mulligan, Mrs. Chen - these supporting characters added variety to the earlier films and were likable. 


VENOM 3 barely has any of that. Chiwetel Ejiofor and Juno Temple are very good actors, but their respective characters [General Strickland and Dr. Payne] could have been played by anyone and it wouldn’t have changed their importance in this film. Strickland is your typical military antagonist who would rather kill the threat rather than reason or understand it. Payne has more of a tragic backstory involving a brother who was murdered after a lightning strike that has crippled one of her arms [she was holding his hand while he was struck], but nothing much really comes from that until the very end when it was too late to care about her or her story. 


We also get the returns of both Detective Mulligan [who is still alive, which makes the government look like jerks for framing an innocent man] and Mrs. Chen [who is one of the film’s short highlights in a cool Las Vegas sequence]. While Chen seems like an addition due to fan service, Mulligan’s role is a bit more sinister and a welcome presence. And there’s also the Moon family [Rhys Ifans playing multiple roles in the Spider-Verse], who are interesting UFO conspiracists that help add to the fun of the final act and give both Eddie and Venom some advice. Still, these characters aren’t all that interesting enough to flesh out a feature-length movie, leaving Eddie and Venom to really have themselves to keep the story moving.


  • The plot itself. Despite being the finale of a trilogy, VENOM 3 feels like the penultimate film to a real finale, considering what’s introduced here. We have Knull starting his villain arc. We have this plot device called the “Codex”, which was created when Venom revived Eddie from death in the first film - a tool Knull needs to escape his world. Everytime the symbiote takes over Eddie, the Codex alerts Knull and his army where it is. It’s a nice plot device that plays well visually, but it doesn’t really go anywhere narratively. Then we have scientists studying different symbiotes to apparently cure people. We also have a traveling family who want to go to Area 51. And a whole bunch of random stuff that takes away from a “final dance” for Eddie and Venom. No mention of Eddie’s ex, Anne. Nothing about Carnage. No mention of the multiverse adventure Eddie took. A lot of the sequences feel repetitive, rinse and repeat. There seems to be a focus in terms of story, but the execution feels a bit unfocused. And I’m gonna be honest - my eyes kept getting heavy while watching a lot of this film. I wish the story was more engaging as the trailers led us to believe.


THE FINAL HOWL

The VENOM movies aren’t the greatest comic book films ever made, but both the 2018 movie and its 2021 sequel are at least fun time-wasters. I wish I could say the same for the trilogy’s finale, VENOM: THE LAST DANCE - which has its moments but is mostly an uninspired, drag of a film with a cool intro and a fun third act CGI action fest. The supporting characters don’t connect with me like the ones in the previous two films. Introducing Knull is a great idea, but he’s wasted here and considering what happens in the end, who is he supposed to be feuding with going forward? There are subplots that seem interesting but just end up feeling meh by the film’s end. 


The only reason to watch this movie is Tom Hardy, continuing to be the highlight of these films in his dual role as both Eddie Brock and his symbiote. Plus, Kelly Marcel does a good job with the special effects and action sequences, considering she’s a first-time director. I honestly wasn’t expecting much out of this film and my expectations were pretty much met. Despite the money this movie has made, Eddie and Venom deserved a better send off than this.



SCORE

1.5 Howls Outta 4

(4 out of 10)




5.07.2022

Doctor Strange In the Multiverse of Madness (2022)

DIRECTED BY

Sam Raimi


STARRING

Benedict Cumberbatch - Dr. Stephen Strange

Elizabeth Olsen - Wanda Maximoff/Scarlet Witch 

Chiwetel Ejiofor - Karl Mordo 

Benedict Wong - Wong 

Xochitl Gomez - America Chavez

Rachel McAdams - Christine Palmer 


Genre: Action/Horror/Fantasy/Adventure/Comic Books


Running Time: 126 Minutes



PLOT

Doctor Strange (Benedict Cumberbatch), with the help of mystical allies both old and new, traverses the mind-bending and dangerous alternate realities of the Multiverse to confront a mysterious new adversary.


REVIEW


After 15 years of not directing a Marvel superhero film since 2007’s SPIDER-MAN 3, Sam Raimi returns to the genre with the latest MCU Phase Four feature - DOCTOR STRANGE IN THE MULTIVERSE OF MADNESS. MCU’s Phase Four seems to be heavily focused on the multiverse, judging by the stories told in WandaVision, Loki and SPIDER-MAN: NO WAY HOME. While DOCTOR STRANGE 2 definitely wants to ride the success of those projects, it’s unfortunately not the best film with that theme. Hell, it isn’t even the best film this year about multiple universes (EVERYTHING EVERYWHERE ALL AT ONCE says hello). But luckily, DOCTOR STRANGE 2 brings up the quality of Phase Four compared to other films included such as BLACK WIDOW and THE ETERNALS.


Marvel promised us a horror film in DOCTOR STRANGE 2 and while it’s never a scary film at all, the imagery that Sam Raimi presents throughout the film are definitely callbacks to his EVIL DEAD franchise, as well as certain elements from DRAG ME TO HELL. And visually, DOCTOR STRANGE 2 is one of the more memorable in the MCU catalog because of it. From possessions, to hideous looking ghouls, to evil mirror reflections and demons and to certain characters looking and acting like zombies, DOCTOR STRANGE 2 has a lot of horror elements that might turn off younger audiences and squeamish viewers. And superheroes actually get murdered in this movie, some in really messed up ways. Marvel and Raimi really pushed that PG-13 rating with some of the film’s brutality, which even surprised me at times considering this is a Disney property.


The cast is really great in this film - in particular both Benedict Cumberbatch and Elizabeth Olsen, who can play their respective roles of Doctor Strange [all of them] and The Scarlet Witch in their sleep at this point. Olsen, especially, is amazing in this film playing through so many emotional beats and making each one of them believable. Newcomer Xochitl Gomez does well with what she’s given. And returning actors Benedict Wong, Rachel McAdams and Chiwetel Ejiofor have memorable moments. I also enjoyed the cameos, although I wish they were in the film more.



Even though I missed Michael Giacchino’s score from the first film, I thought Danny Elfman captured the atmosphere and tone of the film’s story. 


The narrative could have been stronger, as it felt too rushed at times. The film was supposed to be about 35 minutes longer, which makes me wonder what was cut out or reshot as replacements. There were times where you can tell a scene was edited a bit, as it felt a bit incomplete. I also think those lost minutes could have been used for more character development, especially for America Chavez. I also felt that Rick and Morty and Loki scribe Michael Waldron had some cheesy dialogue that didn’t quite work [especially for America Chavez] as well as writing for certain characters that made me think he didn’t watch some of those Disney+ shows that connect to this movie. I also felt the Illuminati stuff could have been longer and felt more important, and what’s the point of a Multiverse movie if you don’t do more with that concept? What we got was pretty neat, but I felt it was more of a teaser for something in the future more than anything. I did dig the mid-credits scene a lot however, as it promises to be a more Doctor Strange type movie that doesn’t deal with any Avengers. So I’m really looking forward to the future.


THE FINAL HOWL


DOCTOR STRANGE IN THE MULTIVERSE OF MADNESS
is a flawed movie, but it’s also a very entertaining one. I can see why some didn’t enjoy it as much as I did. Sam Raimi has a certain style that doesn’t cater to everyone, although I feel it helped this film quite a lot. I think Raimi should have wrote the film to make it even crazier, honestly. It also requires audiences to watch a couple of the Disney+ shows to really understand what’s going on with some of the characters. But besides the muddled screenplay and some of the VFX that look like a video game, the acting is great [Elizabeth Olsen needs her own Scarlet Witch movie for sure], the action is pretty cool, the horror elements and brutality even surprised me in a good way and Raimi’s cool nods to previous films in his filmography added a different feel and tone to this MCU property. I don’t think the film matches the hype, which is unfortunate, but it’s one of the better Phase Four films so far and looks to present a more interesting sequel that will cater to comic book Doctor Strange fans. Not a bad way to start the Summer Season.



SCORE

3 Howls Outta 4

(8 out of 10)





10.10.2021

Venom: Let There Be Carnage (2021)

DIRECTED BY

Andy Serkis


STARRING

Tom Hardy - Eddie Brock/Venom

Woody Harrelson - Cletus Kasady/Carnage

Michelle Williams - Anne Weying

Naomie Harris - Frances Barrison/Shriek

Reid Scott - Dan Lewis

Stephen Graham - Patrick Mulligan

Peggy Lu - Mrs. Chen


Genre - Action/Adventure/Science Fiction/Horror/Comic Books


Running Time - 97 Minutes



PLOT

Eddie Brock (Tom Hardy) attempts to reignite his career by interviewing serial killer Cletus Kasady (Woody Harrelson), who becomes the host of the symbiote Carnage and escapes prison after a failed execution.


REVIEW


Despite the lack of praise critically and the fact that a film for this character was made without the more popular Spider-Man being involved in its origin story, 2008’s VENOM still managed to be a surprise box office success. It scored over $800 million at the global box office, which showed the strength of this popular 90s comic book character and the franchise potential that could be built around Venom. The mid-credits scene for the first film had teased the film I’m reviewing here today, VENOM: LET THERE BE CARNAGE [or VENOM 2 as I’ll call it for the rest of the review], which had a lot of fans excited for what’s to come.


As someone who actually owns the comic with Carnage’s first full appearance from 1992 [ka-ching] due to the cool look of the character, I was super geeked for this movie. While I did have reservations about Woody Harrelson playing Cletus Kasady, he’s not a stranger to playing quirky, serial killer types. And while the PG-13 rating irked me, considering how super violent Carnage is, the idea of motion-capture legend Andy Serkis directing a CGI superhero fest was definitely appealing. Unfortunately, VENOM 2 didn’t really click for me completely due to many factors. But at least it’s silly, stupid and fun.


There’s really two big plot lines going on in VENOM 2. The obvious one is the introduction of Cletus Kasady, as he eventually becomes Carnage due to a sloppy move by the alien symbiote Venom, who leaves a piece of his offspring with Kasady to continue his serial killing rampage. Even though the film is probably shorter than it needs to be, the script does allow time to get into Kasady’s backstory - from being abused as a child, to meeting a superpowered meta in Frances Barrison and falling in love with her and to Kasady’s eventual need to reunite with her after both have been separated. While there’s a lot going on to explain who Kasady is, I do feel it’s done well enough to understand who he is and what his motivations are. Feeling a connection to Eddie Brock, Kasady sort of uses Brock to make himself more famous - which backfires when Venom figures out where Kasady’s victims are buried, leading to a quicker death row date for the serial killer while making Eddie Brock a hot reporter. This animosity leads to Kasady transforming into Carnage and wanting revenge on Brock and his symbiote. It’s pretty typical superhero movie premise 101, which is fine with me.


The other plot line involves Eddie Brock and Venom having relationship issues with one another, turning VENOM 2 into a love story of sorts between the symbiote and its human host. Serkis compared it to The Odd Couple and I definitely can see that comparison. Even after sharing a body for a while, both parties still want to live separate lives. Brock not only wants his ex-wife back [as does Venom], but he’s trying to build back his reputation as a journalist through Cletus Kasady. By suppressing Venom, he feels he can accomplish his goals and stay out of trouble. Venom, however, wants freedom to do what it wants. Venom wants to be the city’s Lethal Protector. Venom wants to kill Anne’s current boyfriend, Dr. Dan, in order for Brock to get back with her. Venom wants the freedom to eat human brains instead of chicken brains. When Venom solves Kasady’s case while Brock takes all of the credit, the two start arguing who is the better detective, which leads to a separation with both parties going their separate ways. Brock ends up trying to survive Kasady’s eventual pursuit for him, while Venom goes from body to body until he comes out to a party crowd how much he loves Brock. And Brock realizes his life is kind of boring with the symbiote. It’s an interesting take on this relationship and one that probably triggered a certain group of people against the so-called “woke” agenda of Hollywood. But I didn’t mind it because it’s used pretty well in the story, since the only ones who really understand them are each other. 



As for the rest of the screenplay, it’s pretty by-the-numbers. While Brock and Venom are going through their thing, Carnage is reuniting with his lover Frances [aka Shriek] - a woman who has powers of sound frequency. If you know anything about the symbiotes, you’ll see exactly where this is going. While the two characters are usually a pair in the comics and do show a bit of affection towards the other, the film kind of treats the pair as a homage to 1994’s NATURAL BORN KILLERS considering it’s one of Harrelson’s most popular roles. We know Cletus and Frances love each other through flashbacks and exposition, but we barely get to see the two of them together in the present to really care about their relationship. The moment she uses her shriek power, the Carnage symbiote is already verbally and physically abusing her - even threatening to kill her if she ever uses her powers around it again. This creates a bit of sympathy for the serial killer, as he pleads with the symbiote not to hurt her. It should create tension and conflicting moments for the characters and the audience. But there isn’t enough time devoted to the relationship prior to the Carnage symbiote taking over Cletus to really create a contrast between the old and the new. 


And that’s the main issue with VENOM 2 - it’s way too short for what it tries to accomplish. Unlike most sequels, the film may be badder but it’s not bigger since it’s about ten minutes shorter than the first film. And when you’re introducing new characters while continuing established stories, you’re going to need a bit more time to connect it all. While I appreciate Andy Serkis not wanting too much filler and exposition, I feel like the film did need a bit of that to feel more complete. Frances feels like a side character compared to Carnage, even though I feel like she has more of the interesting character arc between the two. She was kidnapped as a child, shot by a cop, and then hidden away in this secret facility while they had her locked up while experimenting on her. And when she’s finally free, she’s being sassed by an alien who hates her power, while her boyfriend is trying to keep the peace. Unlike a Harley Quinn, for instance, Shriek never feels like a fully fleshed character but a prop to show that Cletus and his symbiote aren’t as much of a match as Brock and Venom are. And while the character shows potential by the film’s end, it’s just too late for the audience to really care.


As for the other characters, Anne and Dr. Dan are around for comic relief and damsel-in-distress stuff in the final act. They pretty much play the same roles as they did in the first film, not really showing much growth as characters honestly. There’s also Detective Mulligan, who has an interesting backstory and a hostile relationship with Brock. I feel like he’ll have more to do in the next film, but he’s really just around to be another obstacle for Brock and Venom.


And if anyone is expecting an epic battle between Venom and Carnage like in the comics, you’ll probably be disappointed. While it’s better than the final battle in the first film, I was really expecting more considering the action and CGI was a lot better in this movie. I guess what we got out of it was pretty cool as a comic nerd, but I wish there was more conflict between Venom and Carnage as almost a cat-and-mouse type of thriller. While I understood the motivations of the villains, it sort of felt old hat and didn’t really do much in terms of execution. But it was fine for what it was.



Andy Serkis does fine as a director, considering how much of a great motion-capture performer he is. But he’s worked with so many filmmakers, you figure he learned a thing or two from each director he has worked with. Unlike Ruben Fleischer, Serkis isn’t afraid to take on the weirdness of the situation. He uses a lot of physical comedy and goofiness to tell the story, creating interesting visuals in the process. Sometimes the comedy doesn’t always hit, especially when it tries to shield away the horror that Carnage brings to the table - gotta keep that PG-13 rating. But Serkis definitely brings a fun, comic book style energy to the film with his quick pacing and CGI spot fests to amuse audiences for the most part. While I wish the film had a more serious tone going for it considering who the main villain was, Serkis makes sure we’re entertained by the stupidity of it all. I’d like to see what he can do with a stronger script.


The acting is also very good. Tom Hardy seems to be having a blast playing both Eddie Brock and Venom. I felt he was trying to figure out how to balance the roles in the first film, but Hardy seems totally comfortable and game for anything here. Also getting a story credit in the film, it’s obvious he’s all in on the Venom character. He’s honestly the best part of these movies. Woody Harrelson gets to play a PG-13 version of his NATURAL BORN KILLERS character in Cletus Kasady and Carnage. I’m still unsure how I feel about his casting, but he seems to be having fun as well and gets a lot of cool things to do. I think in a longer film, he would have been able to do more with the role. Naomie Harris is fine as Frances, but I think she should have been given more interesting things to do. I really found her character interesting, only because of all the relationships she had to deal with. Again, a longer movie would have benefited her. Michelle Williams and Reid Scott do what they can with what they’re given as Anne and Dr. Dan. Stephen Graham is probably going to get more to do in future installments as Detective Mulligan, but he’s good here with what he’s given. And Peggy Lu is a highlight supporting character as Mrs. Chen. A solid cast for sure, but would have excelled more with a better script.


Let’s be honest - the only thing anyone is going to remember is the mid-credits scene. I won’t spoil it, even though I’m sure many know what it is by now. But I’m very excited to see where it takes this franchise because the potential is huge for VENOM 3 to be a really good sequel if done right. 


THE FINAL HOWL


VENOM: LET THERE BE CARNAGE
is pretty much on par with the first film. It’s not a superhero film masterpiece, but it’s dumb, fun and never boring. While it’s cool to finally see Carnage on the big screen against his nemesis, I do wish the screenplay was stronger and had done more to really elevate the tension between the two characters. In fact, the biggest flaw with this film is that it’s too damn short to let things breathe, let characters get developed and make the final act’s confrontation mean more than it does. But the “love story” between Eddie Brock and Venom is fun and the NATURAL BORN KILLERS-lite between Carnage and Shriek is a nice homage to Woody Harrelson’s past. Andy Serkis does a decent job with a big budget feature, which I’m sure he’ll get better with in time. And the actors, especially Tom Hardy, all seem to be having a lot of fun with the silliness of it all. Plus, that mid-credits scene - huge potential for future installments. But VENOM: LET THERE BE CARNAGE should have been a bit longer and maybe should have had a stronger rating [I mean, it’s Carnage after all]. Not the “Maximum Carnage” it should have been, but it was a decent way to waste 90 minutes in a theater. 



SCORE

2.5 Howls Outta 4




9.12.2019

The WTF? Worst Films Extravaganza Presents: Barb Wire (1996)


DIRECTED BY
David Hogan

STARRING
Pamela Anderson - Barbara “Barb Wire” Kopetski
Temuera Morrison - Axel Hood
Victoria Rowell - Dr. Corrina “Cora D” Devonshire
Jack Noseworthy - Charlie Kopetski
Xander Berkeley - Alexander Willis
Udo Kier - Curly
Steve Railsback - Colonel Pryzer

Genre - Action/Science Fiction/Comic Books

Running Time - 98 Minutes


In the mid-1990s, there was probably no bigger sex symbol on the planet than one Pamela Anderson. While already a Playboy centerfold and appearing frequently on Married… With Children and Home Improvement, it wasn’t until she joined Baywatch that Anderson became a household name and the fantasy of many - including yours truly. As a young teenager during this time, I didn’t admire her for her acting skills, but for her beauty and buxom figure. She had a seductive appeal I couldn’t turn away from, completely invested in whatever project she was a part of.

It was because of Anderson that I even knew what Barb Wire was. The character appeared in 9 issues, plus a mini-series, between the years 1994 and 1996 - a bar owner/bounty hunter who did jobs to pay for her bar and protect people who needed her help. As someone who never read the comics or even knew anyone who talked about them, it’s strange that it was even greenlit as a film project. But in 1996, BARB WIRE was released upon moviegoers, hoping that Anderson’s fanbase would come out in droves. Plus the 1990s weren’t the comic book movie haven the last 20 years have been. Studios were still figuring out how to present these characters, struggling with balancing between the source material and the Hollywood business model of making money through cinema. While only a few comic book films stood out from the pack [BATMAN RETURNS, THE CROW and BLADE among them], BARB WIRE was one of the comic book adaptations that neither audiences or critics cared much for, only making over a third of its budget back and getting nominated for Razzie Awards.

Twenty-years have passed since BARB WIRE was released, as well as the last time I even watched this film. Some bad comic book adaptations have gained a level of cult status and can be appreciated in modern times, but BARB WIRE is still seen as one of the worst films of all time and is currently the 48th film on IMDB’s Bottom List. Is BARB WIRE as bad as many have claimed? Is it as bad as I had remembered it?

PLOT
It’s the year 2017 and the United States is currently dealing with a Second American Civil War. The future has become dystopian, as the former government are now Congressional fascists wanted to control the country with an iron fist, while there is a small number of resistance fighters trying to revolt. Only one city in the United States is considered a free haven for both sides of the fight - Steel Harbor - which also happens to be the home of one Barb Wire (Pamela Anderson), a bar owner of the Hammerhead nightclub who keeps her business running through her job as an undercover bounty hunter. Even though there’s obviously a right side, she remains neutral when it comes to the new Civil War to maintain some peace within the chaos around her.

Things for Barb change when her ex-lover Axel Hood (Temuera Morrison) shows up at Hammerhead needing her help. He’s married to a scientist named Cora D (Victoria Rowell), who the Congressionals have targeted, and both need a pair of retina contacts to get past any retinal scans that would easily allow their escape to a Canadian sanctuary. When both sides cause trouble for her allies and her business, Barb is forced to choose a side.

REVIEW
I’m just gonna come out and say this - BARB WIRE is not a good film in the slightest. And it honestly deserves its low ranking on IMDB because this film has a lot of problems one cannot overlook. But there are a few good things that don’t make BARB WIRE a complete failure.

I think the best thing about BARB WIRE is the film’s production design and slick direction. The film has this 90s MTV music video aesthetic, with quick edits and muted colors. Steel Harbor is your typical dystopian city, looking as gritty as you’d expect out of a comic book film during this time [BATMAN's Gotham City, THE CROW’s Detroit and SPAWN’s New York City]. It matches the noir tone of the story, visually making one understand why characters behave as scummy as they do and why Barb Wire wants an exit strategy to a better place. Even the computer effects look like they were pulled out of a 90’s time capsule. 

And while the story feels a bit rushed at times, the pacing by director David Hogan is decent enough where the film doesn’t drag all that much. Hogan even manages to craft some good action sequences in a 90s syndicated TV action show sort of way. BARB WIRE looks sort of cheap, but I find some charm in that as the comic book wasn’t a major deal to begin with. The lower budget of $9 million actually helps the film rather than hurt it, in my opinion. While everything else that’s major about BARB WIRE quickly falls apart in front of your eyes, the visuals save the movie from being a total bomb. Not a bad job for a director who was picked to save the film [he tried] because the first director had no idea what he was doing with the project.

The music is also very 90s, with a sort of industrial rock-metal sound that dates the film quite a bit. That being said, I liked most of the music of the 1990s and this soundtrack is no exception. I’m not saying this is the greatest music I’ve ever heard, but it fits BARB WIRE’s world extremely well. The opening credits [which I’ll get more into detail in a bit] play out to Gun’s cover of the popular Cameo song, “Word Up.” It’s not a bad cover, although it’s weird to hear once the film starts. We also get a great cover of War’s “Spill the Wine” by late INXS singer Michael Hutchence, Hagfish’s cover of Nick Gilder’s “Hot Child in the City” and “Planet Boom”, a song by Pamela Anderson’s then-husband Tommy Lee of Motley Crue. It’s not a classic soundtrack, but the music stood out as one of the better things about this movie.

As for the acting, there aren’t that many compliments I could make when it comes to BARB WIRE. However, there were some decent actors who tried to make the script watchable. In particular, Jack Noseworthy as Barb’s brother Charlie was particularly good. Even though he probably knew he was on a sinking ship, Noseworthy makes the character relatable and sympathetic as a blind man who wants to bring the light back out of the darkness that surrounds Steel Harbor. I liked his interactions with the other actors, bringing a level of snark and attitude to the role. He was less of a comic book character and more of a real person, which I appreciated. I will also say that Clint Howard is pretty fun in his small role as Schmitz and Udo Kier’s odd performance as Barb’s right-hand man Curly did enough to make me interested in his backstory.

And believe it or not, the concept of BARB WIRE is actually kind of relevant on the surface. The film takes place in 2017 within the United States during a state of crisis where two sides are conflicting over how the country should move forward under new leadership.

Sound familiar?

I’m not going to get into politics or religion or anything that will cause a major debate. But it’s eerie that BARB WIRE almost nailed what’s going on in America right now on the surface. Hopefully we won’t have to kill ourselves over a pair of retina contacts and escape to another country to make things better.

As for the bad stuff, where to start? I guess discussing the terrible acting would be a good place. While she may look the part, Pamela Anderson is really bad in BARB WIRE. I can only judge by the film itself since I know nothing about the character this film is adapting. But I can’t imagine anyone being a fan of BARB WIRE by the way Anderson portrays the role. She seems bored throughout, acting stoically and speaking in this low, gruff voice that doesn’t suit her at all. She’s trying to be both the hero and femme fatale in a modern noir action film and it never clicks believably. She handles the action stuff decently, but there are moments where you can tell she’s uncomfortable with some of the choreography involved. She looks great in tight outfits though.

Most of the supporting cast are disappointing, considering they’re better actors than Anderson and she still steals their spotlight. Temuera Morrison is miscast as Axel Wood, Barb’s former love interest who needs her help. Morrison doesn’t have any sort of chemistry with Anderson, making the idea of a relationship between them pretty laughable. He also doesn’t get to do a whole lot until the final act and it still isn’t a whole lot. Victoria Rowell, of The Young and the Restless fame, is just as bland as Cora D. She doesn’t really bring anything to the role, which is barely one-dimensionally written. Xander Berkeley gets a bit more to do as a corrupted police officer that antagonizes Barb, but he hams it up more than he should. If the film was taken less seriously and had fun with itself, Berkeley would fit right in. While he seems in on the joke, the film never tells him to be funny. And Steve Railsback plays your typical comic book villain who twirls his mustache and overdoes the camp to compensate for the fact that the film should be silly fun but never is. It’s not a strong cast and it’s a shame they try not to be either.

Another strike against BARB WIRE? Taking a comic book concept and subtly turning it into an action remake of the 1942 classic, CASABLANCA! Seriously, who thought it was a good idea in thinking that Pamela Anderson is a logical successor to Humphrey Bogart? And in case you haven’t figured it out - Temuera Morrison is Ingrid Bergman’s Ilsa Lund, Victoria Rowell is Paul Henreid’s Victor Lazlow, Xander Berkeley is Claude Rains’ Louis Renault, and Steve Railsback is Conrad Veidt’s Major Strasser. I guess Jack Noseworthy and Udo Kier are Sam and Carl respectively. The original film never received any credit for this until people who actually watched BARB WIRE figured it out and saw how similar the two films are.

The problem is that CASABLANCA works to this day because it’s plot driven and carries a lot of substance during World War II. Hell, CASABLANCA still resonates today in a lot of ways. You cared about the characters, their relationships and the struggles they faced to escape tyranny and find a level of freedom many felt wasn’t possible. You also felt Rick’s journey from being neutral to wanting to help his ex-lover and her husband live a better life, even if it meant sacrificing the one true love of his life to another man and place. Each character had personality and real reasons to behave the way they did within the context of the story.

BARB WIRE may be more about action, but that can only go so far when the story itself isn’t strong enough to support it. BARB WIRE is about style over substance, but that doesn’t matter when the style isn’t even as good as other comic book adaptations that had been released prior to it and especially compared to those that came right after. The characters of CASABLANCA are in BARB WIRE, but nothing is fleshed out enough for anyone to care about what will happen to each of them. Barb and Axel supposedly had a past relationship, but we never see flashbacks showing them loving each other and struggling with being together. The film’s “letters of transit” are these retina contacts that disrupt retina scanners in order to gain passage to anywhere in the world. But the film just treats them as a plot device to get to the film’s ending rather than something that should really matter to the characters involved. Axel and Cora D want these contacts to escape, but they never seem proactive about it. The villains want them destroyed, but their evil egos take precedence over doing their jobs.

Barb herself is not a likable main character at all, doing selfish things to maintain her club and please her own agenda. When people really need her help, she still would rather please herself until someone she’s close with dies because of her actions. Even though she finally realizes what the right thing is after that, her change of opinion doesn’t feel earned at all. It’s like someone watched CASABLANCA and did a cliff notes version but with more guns and boobs. A part of me admires the balls that someone attempted to remake such a Hollywood classic for a modern audience. But the other part thinks it’s kind of insulting that anyone felt that adding comic book action and hot women would improve on CASABLANCA, when there is absolutely nothing wrong with it.

I also think BARB WIRE, while not a total success, marketed Pamela Anderson in the best way possible that Hollywood would probably allow for the mainstream. They knew people weren’t going to see the film because of her acting, so they blatantly used her sex appeal to get as much interested people in theaters. And the film itself doesn’t try to hide her best assets. The opening credit sequence is Anderson stripping in a tight leather outfit that could barely contain her breasts while water pours all over her. In fact, every outfit in this film has no trouble revealing how huge her breasts are, giving the audience a peek of cleavage and side boob as much as possible. And let’s not forget that scene where Anderson stands up from a bubble bath with only soap covering all of her naughty bits.

The film tries to make Barb seductive, but it’s more a tease than anything. For a film that tries to capitalize on Anderson’s sex appeal, it’s extremely tame and limp. Besides, you can just Google her name nowadays and get way more explicit shots and footage of the 90s star. But back in 1996, this is probably the best way to get your rocks off if you didn’t own any of her previous Playboys. In the internet age, her tease of nudity isn’t even worth marketing. But I’m sure it worked somewhat all those years ago.

THE FINAL HOWL
Is BARB WIRE the worst film I’ve ever seen? Not even close. Is BARB WIRE the worst comic book adaptation out there? Not at all. But it’s also not even close to being a good film, as it’s nothing but a lame CASABLANCA remake but with more guns and boobs. For a film that’s marketed on its sex appeal, it’s pretty prudish for the most part. The acting, especially by Pamela Anderson, drags the film down big time since she’s not a star that’s meant to carry an action film like this on her shoulders. Most of her supporting actors, who would have elevated a film like this, aren’t given much to do since their measurements don’t compare to the film’s star. BARB WIRE does have a good 90s visual look going for it though, with decent enough action sequences and an industrial rock-metal soundtrack that’ll keep most audiences somewhat engaged. And its dystopian concept resonates today, as America is sort of in a midst of a Civil War socially and politically if you really think about it. Unless you’re a huge Pamela Anderson fan and need to see every comic book adaptation out there, then check out BARB WIRE. Otherwise, call the film “babe” and let it knock you into unconsciousness. You’ll get more out of that than watching this flick.


SCORE
1 Howl Outta 4



Related Posts with Thumbnails