From Dusk Till Dawn (1996)

I used to work at Blockbuster. One time while trying to recommend a movie to someone, I was asked why it is that I watch and collect so many older films. Granted, the person doing the asking was a vapid high schooler who, and I'm not joking here, refused to watch any movie that had been made more than 10 years ago on the basis of it "being old." They looked at me, head tilted to the side and said "Why would you watch that? It's old. I don't want to watch old movies." My answer was the suitably snide, condescending remark "Right, because they never made any good films until 2004." The sarcasm was dripping.

Of course the real answer as to why I am always playing catch up with older films is because there are just so many awesome ones out there that I haven't seen yet. Every time I pick up a title that I missed back in the day, I'm always secretly hoping that I'll be kicking myself for missing it earlier. Even better is when that one film leads to the discovery of the body of work of a director or actor I didn't even know about before, but find myself being a big fan of. It's like discovering an old friend you never knew you had.

And "From Dusk Till Dawn" most certainly fits that bill. Why, why, why...WHY IN THE NAME OF ZORDON did I never see this movie until 2013? I don't know how much I would have liked it back in the day, but after seeing it now I can safely say it's some of the most fun I've had watching a movie in a long time.

"From Dusk Till Dawn" is directed by Robert Rodriguez, famous for "Desperado," "Machete," "Planet Terror" among other hyper-violent bloodbaths which are ludicrously entertaining. He also does kids movies. He's not very good at them. Why he does both I have no idea. It's kind of weird. Anyway, Rodriguez is a director I like, and the screenplay was done by one of my all-time favorite writers, Quentin Tarantino, who also stars in the film. There is no way I'm not going to love this film.

From the very beginning of the film, which Rodriguez gives a hot, steamy, sweaty look right from the start, it's not difficult to imagine that this is a lost Tarantino film. The dialogue is punchy, funny, and so packed with fire coming from the mouths of the actors, all of whom are so good it's unreal, that the tension is through the roof and nearly unbearable. This is especially so in the first half of the movie, which plays out kind of like "Reservoir Dogs" mixed with "Natural Born Killers."

Oh yeah. There's no way this is a Tarantino movie with a shot like that.

The story begins in a gas station in Texas, as Texas Ranger Earl McGraw (a recurring Tarantino character played by the inimitable Michael Parks) stops by for a drink and a friendly chat with the attendant (a pre-"Deadwood" John Hawkes). What seems like random chit-chat takes a sudden, shocking turn as the bank-robbing Gecko Brothers, Seth and Richie (George Clooney and Quentin Tarantino respectively) show up to turn a relatively simple hostage situation into a bloodbath. Most of this is due to Richie being a total and irredeemable psychopath.

You know, not much is ever made about Tarantino as an actor, but he really deserves more credit for that than he gets. He's in almost all of his movies, but nobody ever really talks about how good he is when he shows up in any large capacity. His turn as Mr. Brown in "Reservoir Dogs" and Jimmy in "Pulp Fiction" were really good, but in "From Dusk Till Dawn" he really knocks it out of the park. He plays Richie so off-the-handle and so creepily evil that there's never any telling what in the hell he's going to do next. In fact he pretty much carries all the tension of the first half of the film by himself, and there's plenty of tension to be found.

Well, tension AND release...

Seth has to constantly do damage control for his brother, and Clooney is quite magnetic as the calmer, less overtly crazy brother. He'd still be a total scumbag no matter where he was, but next to Richie he's a pretty reasonable dude. Yeah, Seth set a guy on fire, but it was only after Richie started the whole mess. And once you account for Clooney's natural charm, you've got a character who is a villain, but a really likeable one, and you really want to see him make it. Tarantino plays a great character, but you can't help but constantly be amazed by how much Richie sucks, and you wouldn't be too sad if he bought it. In fact you're kind of waiting for it to happen. The biggest question is whether or not Seth is going to be the one to finally take him out or not.

"From Dusk Till Dawn" isn't really structured like an average three act film. It's more like two halves. The first half is vintage Tarantino, full of tension and fantastic dialogue as Seth and Richie kidnap a family and make them drive to Mexico and freedom from the police and FBI who's hot on their trail. The family is Jacob (Harvey Keitel), his daughter Kate (Juliette Lewis) and adopted son Scott (Ernest Liu). Jacob is a former preacher whose faith is shaken after losing his wife, and is on an indefinite road trip to clear his head. They go along with the Gecko brother's orders, but there's always the lingering doubt in both his and the audience's mind whether or not they'll be let go as promised at the end of the journey. This is especially so with Richie being insane and killing people over looks he imagined they had.

Not long after they reach their destination, a strip club in Mexico called "The Titty Twister," is when the movie begins the second half. And it's here that I will suggest, if you've never seen "From Dusk Till Dawn," and have no knowledge of it whatsoever, you stop reading IMMEDIATELY. Don't even watch the trailer. Don't look up any pictures of it. Don't do any research whatsoever. Don't even read the description on the back of the case or on Netflix. You need to go in blind because the second half of this film has one of the most radical, drastic and completely off-the-wall twists I've ever seen, and unless you've seen the trailer (which completely spoils it) there's no possible way you'd ever come close to imagining what's in store.

"Huh. Didn't see that coming."

I'm dead serious. Stop reading this and go watch "From Dusk Till Dawn" while 100% ignorant of it. Trust me, it'll be awesome.

I'm not even going to go into great detail about what actually happens on the off chance you're still reading. It's enough to say that during the blood-soaked climax of "From Dusk Till Dawn," there exists enough insanity for around 3 other films. Body parts fly everywhere, blood and other fluids of various colors and origin cover the place like varnish on a dresser, and the cheese is off the meter as "From Dusk Till Dawn" turns into something like a spiritual successor to "The Evil Dead." It's certainly a thing to behold.

The practical effects are skillfully done enough to be disgusting and corny enough to also be a comedic blast for those with a twisted sense of humor. This was also back before CGI blood was the standard, and action wasn't filmed with shaky cam to be "more intense," so there is also a lot of fun artistry to the carnage, harkening back to "The Thing" and once again, "The Evil Dead." There's just something special about seeing practical effects in front of the camera which lends an air of credibility and enjoyment for those of us who like seeing the creative process of film-making at work.

And of course this is all going down around a great cast, like everything Tarantino is involved in. The leads are all still there, but added to the fray once we arrive at the strip club are horror movie legend Tom Savini, NFL and B-movie hero Fred Williamson, Robert Rodriguez BFF Danny Trejo, and finally Cheech Marin in one of the three parts he plays in this film. Selma Hayek even shows up to do some sexy dancing. What's not to like?

"Well this was fun. I'm going to go lay down now."

From the first frame of "From Dusk Till Dawn" to the last, I was glued to the screen. I love this movie. Anyone looking to have a good, bloody time is going to love it. Some may prefer one half over the other, in fact I kind of like the first half more, but they're so vastly different that one can almost look at them as two different films all together. Almost like "Well, that movie's done. That was really tense. Too bad it didn't have much of an ending. Oh well. Let's watch this crazy gory splatterfest next! That's going to be a lot of fun! And hey, it's got the same cast. Neat!"

In fact...holy crap. Flip those two around in terms of order of sequence and cram it into an hour and a half and you've essentially got "From Dusk Till Dawn!"

THE BOTTOM LINE - I'm so upset that I came to this one late, because it's probably one of my favorite movies from the 90's now. In terms of blood, guts, laughs and awesome Tarantino dialogue, few things can top "From Dusk Till Dawn" outside of an actual Quentin Tarantino movie. One of the best action films of that decade. I just wish it hadn't been spoiled for me all those years ago when I saw the trailer. Seeing it blind would have been amazing.

Savages (2012)

Considering that not only was the last Oliver Stone movie I watched, "Alexander," so bad that it was one of the only movies I've ever hit the STOP button on, but that the only thing I'd heard about "Savages" was "OH MY GOD NO," I was skeptical going into this one. Or at the least, my expectations could have been entered into a limbo competition.

"Savages" ended up being one of those films that on the surface was easy to dislike. It's way too proud of itself, the protagonists are unlikable, and there is a lingering reek of style over substance prevalent throughout, and I wouldn't care too much to see it again. On the other hand, I didn't feel it was as bad as I had heard it was. In fact, much to my surprise and to the film's credit, I was never bored with it. But in the end there were two things that stopped it from being what I would otherwise consider a solid movie.

"Savages" is a movie about two weed dealers, Ben and Chon, and their girlfriend Ophelia, known simply as O. I should also mention that this movie features gratuitous use of stupid names. I can't tell you how difficult taking a film seriously is when one character has a name that when spoken sounds just like "John" but isn't, and the characters are saying things like "Tell us where O is!" Try looking between N and P you stupid stoner clods.

Oh yeah. I'd love for my rescuers to get baked out of their minds before coming to save me.

Back to the story. That was not a typo earlier when I said O was Chon and Ben's girlfriend. They have a polygamous relationship, which is a concept I have a hard time understanding. Personally I've never been able to wrap my head around sharing a girlfriend with another dude, but I am the jealous type. Ben is an annoying hippie, and Chon is a less annoying ex-military guy who smuggled "the best weed in the world" back from Afghanistan, which they used to start up their business. They've been very successful, so much so that a Mexican drug cartel wants a piece of their action.

When Ben refuses to go along with the deal, the cartel kidnaps O and holds her under threat of death unless Ben and Chon do exactly what they say. And while the cartel is certainly a bunch of jerks, Ben and Chon really have nobody to blame but themselves for what happened. They were stupid, they tried to be smarter than the cartel, and it didn't work so good. Well, that and they let O just traipse around just asking to be kidnapped mere hours before they were set to leave the country. Oops.

That gag in her mouth? Best. Feature. In the film.

The rest of the movie is about Ben and Chon trying to get O back from the cartel using sabotage, a squad of former soldiers and a crooked DEA agent, all while dodging a vicious mobster who is on their trail. To be honest it's not a bad little setup, and I found the plot to be genuinely interesting and well presented.

Taylor Kitsch and Aaron Johnson as Chon and Ben, respectively, both do passable jobs in their roles. Johnson has proven himself to be a fantastic actor as the lead in "Kick-Ass" and was almost unrecognizable as John Lennon in "Nowhere Boy." Here, he's stuck playing a Buddha quoting, hippie douchebag, so he's a bit of a pill, but I guess he did an amiable enough job doing so. He does feel a bit wasted here, as the problems of the movie did tend to overshadow what was a good performance, particularly his disgust and anguish when he is forced to take place in cold blooded killing.

Taylor Kitsch has been something of a reverse-lucky rabbit's foot since starring in not one but two indescribably colossal bombs this summer: "Battleship" and "John Carter." I'm not sure he'll be finding much work after 2012, especially since his best performance thus far has been in "Savages," a movie which barely made its money back. The dude is a walking box office curse. Normally I'd feel sorry for him, but I haven't been impressed enough by his performances to care that much. And yes, this is his best role to date, but he still comes off like a less-charismatic Channing Tatum.

"Hold on. Something's wrong...my god...I don't have a joint in my mouth! Ben? BEN!!! HELP!!!"

Blake Lively as O is, to put it bluntly, terrible. Everything about her in this film is terrible. I'm not sure how you make a character this obnoxious and whiny likeable, but it certainly isn't by casting a crap actress in the role. Like "Highlander 2" trying to retcon Zeist out of the consciousness of moviegoers, Blake Lively should have been expunged from "Savages." And while that would have wrecked a bit of havoc with the plot, it could still be fixable. Have them trying to rescue their pet hamster or something, I don't know. Whatever they chose, it'd be a step up.

There are some shining gems in "Savages," however. They can be found in Benicio Del Toro's absolutely brilliant turn as a terrifying mobster/gardener/80's hairstyle spokesperson, Lado. He's greasy, he's gross, he's creepy, and he's so scary and intimidating that you can never be sure what he's capable of. The closest comparison I can throw out there is that he reminded me of Javier Bardem in "No Country For Old Men." If there was one single reason to see this film, this is it.

Oh my god that hair. Glorious.

The other person who was great in "Savages" was John Travolta. His personal life aside, I'm a big fan of his, and like Nicolas Cage I'm always entertained as hell watching him. Here he's playing the crooked DEA agent who is keeping Chon and Ben safe for some deeply personal reasons. The best scene in the movie, and indeed the best bit of acting in the whole film is a scene between Travolta and Del Toro, surprise surprise, the two best actors in it. In it, Del Toro has Travolta at gunpoint, and Travolta pleads for his life, urging Del Toro to understand why killing him would be the stupidest thing for him to do. It's a dynamite scene which is far better than I expected considering the rest of the cast.

"Ben, am I tripping or is John Travolta in our back seat?"

This brings us to the big problems of "Savages" that had to haven been changed for it to be a decent movie. And while one of those wasn't a deal breaker, it was just really annoying, there is a problem in this film that nearly ruins the entire experience. It also goes beyond my normal nitpicking and becomes something that I don't think a single person watching would be able to call good.

The first change that would have to be made is that the prevalent voice over crap that narrates the film needed to go. Every instance of Blake Lively spewing her overly tongue-in-cheek nonsense should have been removed from the soundtrack. There was no reason for any of that tripe to be in there in the first place, because her exposition is never telling us anything that A) we couldn't have simply found out via visual cues B) isn't redundant because it's often obvious what's going on or C) is crap that we didn't need to know in the first place.

"Savages" thinks it's so freaking clever with it, when it comes across as merely trite and pretentious. The opening voice over tells us "Just because I'm telling you this story doesn't mean I'm alive at the end of it. Yeah, it's one of those stories." Not only is this line reading done very poorly, as Blake Lively is bad at everything having anything to do with acting, but it comes across as snarky and too proud of itself by half. And if there's one thing I hate it's snarky, overly sarcastic characters. And O could be a poster child for snark, if such an organization existed.

I was also confused by O being this all-knowing voice telling us things that she would have no way of knowing, which makes me curious as to how she is telling us this stuff besides the fact that she's the narrator. She spends a good chunk of the movie in captivity (which coincidentally is the most tolerable section of the film, as she's pretty much out of the picture), so how is she supposed to know about events going on that she isn't witness to? Maybe you're saying that she's telling us all this after the fact after getting clued in by Ben and Chon, but if that's the case, how does she know about things that happened when none of them were there? It's a minor nitpick, sure, but she was so irritating I was finding fault all over the place purely out of spite.

Was Benicio texting her when he was off doing his own thing or something?

This breaking of the fourth wall like that is not a small bit annoying, particularly since nothing in the rest of the film does anything close to that. The rest is like a normal, albeit very stylized, 90's film. That is until the ending, which is the other thing that needed a huge overhaul.

The end of "Savages" is, without hyperbole, probably the worst ending to any film I've seen this year. It's so moronic, unwanted and frankly insulting to the audience that it takes what would have otherwise been a flawed yet respectable enough movie and turns it into something that is borderline unrecommendable. I'm not joking either. The end of "Savages" is so bad that it may well be the only thing you'll remember. At the very least it will be the only thing you'll be talking about once the credits start rolling. And they will not be kind words.

I knew about the ending going into it, and while it did instill me with a bit of dread and irritation knowing that the movie I was admittedly invested in and halfway enjoying was going to have a crap ending, it did soften the blow just a bit when it came. So for those of you playing along at home I'm going to go ahead and just tell you about the end, on the off chance you'll see "Savages."

At the end of the movie Chon, Ben, O and Lado all die in a shootout. Everyone is dead. Credits should have started rolling on what would have been a dreary ending, but an acceptable and fitting one. And then Blake Lively starts in with her BS about how "That's how I imagined it was going to happen." The screen starts freaking out, the movie starts rewinding itself and *BAM* we're back at the start of the end scene again - only this time it goes down differently as Lado betrays his boss, and everyone but her lives happily ever after.

Yes. They actually pulled a "Clue." Only it sucked.

It's enough to make you yell at the screen. It's enough to make you face-palm. It's enough to make you feel like you've wasted the past 2 hours. And it's enough to make you wish upon everything holy that Blake Lively's character had been cut completely from the film.

I did all of those things once the "It was all a dream" ending hit. And I knew I was coming, too. I can only imagine how mad I would have been had that caught me off guard. So I'm telling you right now: Do yourselves a favor and stop the movie when they die. The film is over. Roll credits and be happier in the knowledge that you prevented a B- movie from going to a D+. Yeah, the ending is that bad. Everything else is just kind of...mildly acceptable.

In the end it really seems like Oliver Stone was trying to make another "Natural Born Killers." He did not succeed. So...when is he going to make another Vietnam movie?

THE BOTTOM LINE - "Savages" wasn't as bad as I had heard, but it had its share of problems. The severity of those problems depends a lot on your personal tastes. Since I hate snarky characters and too-clever-for-itself writing, it bugged me a fair amount. Take all that out and stop the movie with 5 minutes left and you've got a decent, bloody crime thriller. Although several points are automatically docked for the movie coining the term "Wargasms." Ugh.