Phantom (2013)

It occurs to me as I write this entry that there really haven't been many movies about submarines that I haven't liked. At least, I can't think of a submarine movie that I haven't at least found passable. I've never seen one that made me mad at it.

I mean you've got "Das Boot," "The Hunt for Red October," and "Crimson Tide" which gives the genre pedigree by themselves, but don't forget about "Down Periscope" either. That's actually one of my favorite comedies, as strange as they may sound. Even the low-budget Rutger Hauer vehicle "Hostile Waters" I found to be decent. I think the worst I've seen was probably "U-571" and "K-19," and those weren't really bad, they were just okay.

Submarines are just an interesting setting for a film. It's inherently tense without really even trying, what with being in a tin can below the water, where one mistake could leave you crushed in an instant. All it takes is good direction and half-way decent writing and acting and you've got most of the work done for you as far as suspense goes. Like I said, I like these kinds of movies.

This brings me to "Phantom," a film about a Russian submarine during the Cold War starring Ed Harris and David Duchovney. That premise alone gets a hardy "Hell Yes" from me. Ya'll know I loves me the Duchovney. I remember it got a small theatrical release in March, but it wasn't playing anywhere near me, which ticked me off because I would have seen it even if it was only rocking a 25% on Rotten Tomatoes, which it was. But that website isn't very trustworthy most of the time, anyway, so my interest in it was still firmly in the "very" category.

Archeologists could probably find ruins of ancient civilizations in those valleys and crags on his face.

After seeing it I honestly have no earthly idea what it's doing at a 25% on Rotten Tomatoes. "Phantom" isn't a mind-blowing epic or anything, and its tin-foil hat may be showing ever so slightly, but it's a solid submarine movie that hits nearly every note which makes the genre work, and it's headed by a really solid cast that sells what they're doing quite well. I hate to use phrases that would normally get slapped on a DVD case, but "Phantom" is a pretty rousing thriller, and I enjoyed myself.

Based on true events in the same way "A Perfect Storm" was (in that the filmmakers actually have no idea what really happened but hey this scenario would not have been physically impossible), "Phantom" follows the final voyage of a Russian submarine which was hijacked by members of an extremist branch of the KGB and turned into a vessel for starting a war between China and the US. The eponymous "Phantom" is a device the KGB has installed on the ship which makes it essentially invisible, and is the lynchpin in their plan. So yes, notes of "The Hunt for Red October" are present, but that movie is awesome, so shut up.

Pssh. A submarine in the water. Seen it before. Boo. Zero Stars.

Everything past that is standard submarine movie fare, which isn't to say it's bad or boring, but it is a fairly by-the-book story. Of course we know that World War III didn't happen, so we know the KGB don't succeed in their plan, but it's still tense to see how or if the men on the boat are going to get out of the situation, because the film is made with very competent direction and pacing by director Todd Robinson.

The cast is a solid mix of big names like Harris and Duchovny who both tear it up, and a collection of "that one guy from that one movie" actors like William Fichtner and Sean Patrick Flanery. It's even got Lance Henriksen showing up for 3 minutes in the beginning for a scene they can put in the trailers to drop some quick exposition. I was particularly a fan of Jason Gray-Stanford, who plays one of the boat's officers, because he looks exactly look Goose in "Top Gun." So that's pretty awesome.

I must say that I really, really enjoyed Duchovny's role in "Phantom." I've never seen him play a villain, but after this I think it would be a real missed opportunity if he didn't do it more often. On top of his character, Bruni, being a very well-written role because he's one of those great villains who doesn't think he's a villain at all, Duchovny's trademark deadpan delivery and fantastic cold eyes makes him a lot of fun to watch.

What? David Duchovny playing a member of a shadowy, fringe, paranoid government organization who goes off and does his own thing regardless of what his superiors want? What a twist.

My favorite dialogue from the film was in a scene where Harris asks Duchovny why he's doing what he's doing, to which Duchovny explains that the US now has first-strike capabilities. That means that Russia must strike first because America now has their finger on the button. Harris asks the obvious question, "What makes you think they'd attack us first?" Duchovny replies in a very calm, logical, why-do-you-even-ask tone of voice, "We would." That was straight up chilling. Props to Duchovny.

There is one big thing about "Phantom" that didn't work, and was pretty weird despite the fact that by the end I had accepted it, and that is the fact that nobody here even attempts to have a Russian accent. Not one single cast member. In fact I'm pretty sure the navigator had a Texas drawl going on. And while it's probably best to either go all or nothing with that kind of thing, the "nothing" approach did make itself a constant distraction. At least Sean Connery was surrounded by guys doing Russian accents, and Connery himself has an accent, even though it's Scottish. "Phantom" sounds like they filled the sub with the cast of "Field of Dreams."

Oh hey. It's...you. I remember you from...oh geez what was the freaking movie? You know...the one with that other guy. The guy with the face? That movie. You were in that, too, I think. Are you sure you're not Sig Hansen?

Apart from that I heard some people complain about the end of the film being silly, but I disagree. Yes, it does get a bit (okay a lot) metaphysical and artsy, but it actually didn't take me out of the movie at all. Honestly I thought it was quite poetic and rather moving. It gives some closure to a film that by all accounts really couldn't have much of one had they simply left it where it normally would have ended.

So why did this movie get panned? I have no idea. I guess you either like these kinds of movies or you don't. I think people can expect a bit too much from films sometimes, particularly when the premise is fairly simple. I mean, there's only so much you can do in a submarine movie. It's about guys crammed in a metal cigar box underwater. Their options are limited. But as long as the tension is there, what more do you want from a submarine movie?

Check out the trailer for "Phantom."

THE BOTTOM LINE - "Phantom" is a solid entry in the submarine movie genre. It's not doing anything overly original besides casting David Duchovny as a villain (which makes it worth seeing by itself), but the skill with which it's made makes it a fun, intense ride. I was invested beginning to end, despite the story being most likely ridiculous, although the behind the scenes features on the DVD offering a defense of the story is admittedly interesting and oddly compelling. If you're a submarine movie fan, this is definitely one to check out.

It's In The Blood (2012)

There's a brand of films out there which I've labeled as "Southern Weird." I don't know if I'm the only person who has ever labeled it as such, but that's what I call it. Those are movies that usually take place in the deep American South, and they will have this surrealist tone and look to them, which will typically be enhanced by non-traditional storytelling and editing. What you end up with is usually a experience where you're not exactly sure what in the world just happened, but you know for a fact it was sweaty, very yellow-tinted, and probably more than a little drunk.

Movies like "Killer Joe," "In The Electric Mist" or "Bad Lieutenant" are good examples of what I'm talking about. It's often a tripy experience, and as such can also lend itself well to the horror genre. As long as you don't mind not exactly understanding everything. Personally I'm about 30% when it comes to whether or not I'll like it. It's not really my thing, although on occasion it can be awesome.

"It's In The Blood" is most certainly worthy of the label of "Southern Weird," as it takes place in the South and is most definitely weird. And while the presence of Lance Henriksen is enough to make me take notice in any case, I was hopeful that the film would be either scary enough or weird enough to be unique and memorable.

Unfortunately "It's In The Blood" wasn't scary, although it was weird enough. The weirdness is twofold here, as the actors make some questionable choices in their acting methods, and the story is obtuse and borderline indecipherable. Now, the real question is: Is it solid enough to make those things not matter? The answer is: "No."

"It's In The Blood" follows the unfortunately named October (Sean Elliot) as he goes on a hike in the woods with his father Russell (Lance Henriksen), who is a sheriff in a small hick town. October hasn't seen his father in a long time due to some horrifying things that happened, which are explained as the film progresses. Eventually we find out that October and his girlfriend (who is also his adopted sister) Iris were tortured by one of Russell's deputies, which ended with Russell getting shot in the stomach and the guy blowing Iris' head off before shooting himself. This is, naturally, after the deputy  rapes her.

So yeah, good times all around, really.

Understandably October has issues with going back there, for which I can't blame him. Personally if that happened to me in a town where psychos like that make deputy I'd nuke the site from orbit. (It's the only way to be sure.) But he goes back, mostly because he does kind of feel bad for his dad since he's all alone now, but deep down there's a part of him that hates Russell and wants to tell him so to his face.

And there is where the main thrust of the film is, so to speak. "It's In The Blood" goes into some metaphorical, surrealist territory which finds October literally fighting his demons which manifest into real creatures, severely hurt Russell, and trap them in the woods. From that point on it's really about October and Russell begrudgingly working together and trying to patch things up while they attempt to survive the whole mess, which given Russell's condition doesn't seem likely. And then more weird stuff happens, October faces his demons both figuratively and literally and the movie ends without really explaining a thing.

Wow. The film literally ends with the main character walking through a door in the middle of field of sunflowers. If an artsy cliche is so cheesy that it would normally be used to make fun of artsy cliches, and a film still uses it, is it still artsy or just cheesy?

I "get it," you know. It's a metaphor for forgiveness and holding on to rage and blame and whatnot, but honestly I just didn't find it that interesting. While the acting is good on occasion, particularly from Henriksen, it doesn't help much because it's still a movie that is trying way too hard to be cerebral when it's not that complex. And the mixing of the real and trippy was, to me, detrimental to the film as a whole. I just prefer one or the other, otherwise it's distracting when we fall down the rabbit hole into Wonderland after stepping off of Big Daddy's porch.

Speaking of distracting, don't equate teaching your son how to drive a manual transmission to having an orgasm. It's...unsettling. Particularly when it's coming from Lance Henriksen. I like him as an actor. Please don't put the image of him sexually aroused in my head. I don't need that, movie. Keep in mind that this is already a film featuring brother/adopted sister action. Let's not add "father getting off on his son's stick shifting abilities" to the list of "ew" present. Freaking South.

Mmmm that's good shifting.

I will give the film credit for a rather well done scene of leg amputation. It's not that it's particularly good in terms of effects, although I can imagine it being done much worse, but the lead up to it and the acting is solid, and it was enough to make me wince and not want to look. Although through Lance's screams and moans I caught him simply saying "Ow" once, which while pretty funny kind of ruined the moment.

But again, Henriksen is quite good here, and it's probably one of the better roles he's had in some time. There's a lot of character for him to chew on, and it's fun watching him get into the depths of the sadness and loneliness of Russell. One little monologue in particular that struck me as surprisingly good when compared to the film overall concerns Russell talking about how pathetic and empty his life is. It's so bad that every night he gets drunk and watches static on the TV until he passes out. It's actually a sadly moving speech, and Lance kills it. But then again, I'm not sure if one good speech from Lance Henriksen, as awesome as he is, is enough to make the whole experience worthwhile.

And no, I have no idea what "It's In The Blood" is referencing, since the mental trauma suffered by October is most certainly not genetic, and October is about as different from his father as you could reasonably be. Even the stretched sexual connotations ones could torturously make between him and Iris doesn't work because they're not blood relatives. Even the psycho wasn't related. What's in the damn blood?! Am I stupid for missing something?

Or is it just an ominous sounding but ultimately pointless title? You pick.

 
THE BOTTOM LINE - "It's In The Blood" honestly comes across more like an episode of "The X-Files." One of the lousy ones you only watched once because David Duchovney or Gillian Anderson were off filming something else, so it became a go nowhere filler episode that wasn't necessarily bad, but you just couldn't bring yourself to care about it. Sure it's weird and all, but it's weird without feeling like you've seen anything worth seeing by the end.

The Terminator (1984)

What am I supposed to say about "The Terminator" that hasn't been said a thousand times before? Not only is it one of the defining action movies of the 80's, but it also made legitimate stars of Arnold Schwarzenegger and James Cameron. And it's one of my favorite movies. Ever. In fact, I'm in the rare position of being a bigger fan of "The Terminator" than I am of "Terminator 2: Judgement Day." That's not something you hear often.

I think that for me, the reason I like "The Terminator" more than any of the sequels is because it's the only one that makes sense by itself. In fact it works best when viewed as a stand-alone film, due to the sequels having annoying time paradoxes that rear their ugly heads because of the mere fact that sequels exist.

This franchise got so convoluted and out of control with the mind-bending plot holes that it's really best to not even think about it, lest your head implode. But with the first film, it's a nice little package that ties itself up nice and pretty. And you don't have to ask questions like "How did Skynet create itself by sending technology back in time from the future if it couldn't exist in the future it sent technology back from because it didn't exist in past?"

Shut up and eat your popcorn.

What strikes me about the look and feel of "The Terminator" is that it is one of the most bleak action films I think I've ever seen. There's this barely subdued nightmarish quality about it, almost like you're floating in a bad dream. The color palette is all greys and blacks, almost the entire movie takes place at night, and the soundtrack during the action scenes is all electronic madness going nuts like a 'nipped-up cat rolling around on a Casio keyboard while their owner is in the garage pummeling an anvil with a sledgehammer. Even the main theme, incidentally one of the greatest ever, promises only darkness and oppression.

And being that the movie has only two settings, which are "Waiting" and "OH SWEET JESUS RUN FOR YOUR LIVES" that nightmarish quality is only enhanced by the unrelenting tension, which never really lets up. I am reminded a bit of "Jaws," being that even when you don't see the shark, you know it's out there somewhere. For that reason, anytime someone gets in the water, they're fair game even if you don't see anything. And like the shark popping up to scare the bajesus out of Roy Scheider,  the Terminator could easily bust through a wall at any moment. Most likely to shoot someone in the face.

Although James Cameron was right when he said that Arnold playing the Terminator shouldn't have worked, since the whole concept of the Terminator was to blend in and look very unassuming, there's two very good reasons why it did. The first is that Arnold Schwarzenegger is a scary looking man. There's no way around it. If you have Arnold as a villain, he's going to be scary. Well, unless Joel Schumacher is involved, but that's a whole other conversation.

"Oh man. I willingly choose to forget what I did last night..."

The second reason is that Schwarzenegger turns in what is honestly a brilliant performance here. He had been only Hercules and Conan before becoming the Terminator, but after this film he became someone to really take notice of. And although it's easy to make fun of the guy and crack wise about how playing an emotionless robot is the best role for him, Arnold plays the Terminator spectacularly well, and it's honestly one of the best, most subtle villainous performances in film. The only other guy I can think of that's ever come close to being as chilling in his silence would have to be Dolph Lundgren in "Rocky IV." And Ivan Drago actually had fewer lines than the Terminator did in this movie.

There is an art to playing someone with no emotions. It's not enough to not move any facial muscles and deadpan everything. There still has to be something behind it. When you look at both Schwarzenegger's face in "The Terminator" and Lungren's face in "Rocky IV," there's this cold, calculating intensity behind the eyes that you just can't fake. When Arnold first appears and slowly takes in his surroundings the processors in the Terminator's head can almost be heard whirling. And when Ivan stares down Rocky or Apollo, it's very similar. You don't know what this guy is thinking, but you know it's no good, and you know he's very, very dangerous. Especially to street punks who like to pick on naked people.

A wild Bill Paxton appears!

While Arnold is the actor everybody thinks of when talking about these films, I must admit that one of the main reasons I love the first film so much is because of Michael Biehn. I've never understood why Michael isn't a household name when he's appeared in some huge movies throughout the years. And it's not like he had small roles, either. He was Cpl. Hicks in "Aliens," he was the bad guy in "The Abyss," he was the most memorable villain out of many in "Tombstone," and he was in the only good Michael Bay movie, "The Rock." And here he's Kyle Reese, the guy who is John Connor's father. He's kind of a big deal.

And he's also a really good actor, too. He is one of my all time favorites, having the badassery of Kurt Russell and the intensity of Nicolas Cage but without the goofiness. His portrayal of Kyle Reese is really heartfelt and full of pain, and he knows that the best case scenario is that he's almost certainly going to die. But his love for Sarah Connor, a women he's never met and has traveled through time for, keeps him going enough to make sure she's safe no matter the cost. Dramatically it's probably up there among the best roles he's portrayed.

Too bad he dresses like a flasher, though. Ah well. The 80's.

Linda Hamilton deserves a lot of credit as Sarah Connor, as she's probably one of the best female protagonists of action movie history. Her character arc is very compelling and at the same is quite subtle, since the movie doesn't bash us over the head with the fact that she's going to become this hardass survivalist later in life. A lesser movie would have her pick up something heavy and pointy and beat the Terminator to death with it in a scene that has her "realize her destiny" and crap.
 
But since that would be stupid and would make no sense, she survives by using her wits, courage and a bit of good luck. She's not a solider yet, after all. But she will be, to which the movie drops hints by her being a natural at applying a field bandage and having a really good "ON YOUR FEET, SOLIDER!" voice when she needs it. Again, subtle.

Why James Cameron went insane and lost all sense of subtly by the time "Avatar" came around I have no idea. I blame constant success and deep sea diving.

"Now I'm off to actually invent time travel! That way I can go to the future when technology has finally caught up to my vision!!! Then I can wait another decade for it to catch up to me again! I AM THE FUTURE."

It's a lot of fun to watch "The Terminator" and spot all the actors in it that you know you've seen in something else but you just can't place it. Naturally seeing Bill Paxton with pointy blue hair is a sight to behold and elicits a mighty squee from me every time, but Lance Henriksen is also always a lot of fun to watch. Although I'm not quite sure if his character's schtick, that being that he always has a lame story to tell that gets cut off before it goes anywhere ever really materialized the way it was probably intended. I don't think enough time was spent with the cops to really have that pay off. But in any case, the repartee between Henriksen and the late great Paul Winfield is awesome.

Especially when you imagine that it's Bishop talking to Lucius Sweet

There's also that guy with the really big mouth. You know, from "The X-Files" and "Mortal Kombat: Annihilation." Yeah, that guy. His name is Brian Thompson, and he's the punk who gets his heart ripped out of his chest by Schwarzenegger. So that's cool. Oh and by the way, Rick Rossovich is Ginger's boyfriend in this. You all know Rick Rossovich, right? Nothing? Oh, come on! He was Slider in "Top Gun!" He stinks!

Ugh. Why do I even try?

Without question "The Terminator" is up there with the best movies Schwarzenegger has ever been involved in, and it's one of my favorite action flicks. And I know I've said before that I prefer it over "T2," but I have to be honest when I say it's probably my second favorite James Cameron movie, second only to "Aliens." What can I say? I liked Cameron before he went nuts.

Check out the AWESOMELY cheesy trailer. I love how the dude says the name of the movie like 12 times.

THE BOTTOM LINE - If you've never seen "The Terminator" I really don't know what you're doing, because there are few action movies that are as intelligent and intense as this one. Seriously, drop what you're doing and find a way to watch it. It's readily available. Go. NOW! And if you've already seen it, well hell. Watch it again. We'll make a night of it. I've got the brewskis. Let's do this. Come with me if you want to live!