The BAD Action Movies

•  CRANK: High Voltage 

Honestly, if you ever wondered . . . What goes on inside a guy's head? Their answer was a look inside his pants! It was a live version of a bad video game. That's probably what they intended. Like Tarantinos' Pulp Fiction, how can you fault it when they're aiming low and hitting the mark?  If there was a sleazy stripper in L.A. missing from this one, it was probably because she ended up on the cutting room floor.

The beginning was cool in a video-game way. Gory death around each corner for whoever came up against Chev Chelios, and then it went south, literally, when he sticks a shotgun up a guy's butt.  Need I say more about the film's maturity level or content? Yeah, I do. I paid to see it, so I get to . . .

I really like Jason Statham and the fact that he did all his own stunts in the first movie. If he's having fun and getting paid, can it be all bad? Yeah, it can. I didn't ask for my money back and I stayed right through the end of the credits to see the outtakes, etc., but it's just kinda sad that this is what grown men think is entertainment: violence combined with ugly naked skanks, porn, and sex in public.  (Must have been their list of "What gives me a boner?") The one really out of place scene was when Chev and Eve, clothed (!), kiss with a rainbow starburst behind them.  Imagine that! Grown men with a 7th-grade-level sexual immaturity have a 5th grade idea of love.  Sweet. Sad. Scary.

Their idea of being clever included: a nod to Japanese culture with a Godzilla homage where a giant Chev fights it out with the bad guy knocking over electrical towers, a nod to their (all guys) obvious love of Full Metal Jacket's "Me so horny" girls, giving Corey Haim and Geri Halliwell a job, and the use of a Billy Squier song. All of those weren't enough to redeem this movie for me. Not even an appearance by David Carradine helped—it was just sad to see him sink to the level of playing Poon Dong. Yeah, that's the character's name. Even sadder that it was his last role. And I guess it was just easy money for singer Dwight Yoakam—who was actually good in Hollywood Homicide—to just do the same role again as he did in Crank, just sloppier and stupider. Why Dwight? Get over being bald and short. You're an awesome singer! (By the way, this photo on the left, a man who gets to this stage in how he treats women is probably just a step away from killing them.) The only thing gross thing missing was for a lump of shit to be stuck in the hairs on Jason Statham's ass in the butt shot. How did they miss that opportunity? Was there something Jason actually said "No" to? Afraid to say it but, I think so, and I don't want to know what it was.  Even the 8-10 year olds in the audience— yeah, that's right, kids brought in by their fathers, no doubt without their ex-wives' permission or knowledge—commented at the end that the movie was bad. 

I saw it because despite the totally gratuitous and tacky sex in the first one, and the expectation that the second one would only be worse, I thought the direction in the first one had a really cool look. The choppy sequences, the odd camera angles, the frenzied editing, it all worked and added to the 'cranked-up' feeling.  I wish I could say the same for this sequel. They tried too hard; too many shots together, not delivering the intended impact.  Like a pretty piece of colorful something that catches your eye as you pass a garbage can, you pick it up with great expectation but on close examination, yeah, it's just trash.

 • GAMER
This movie failed for me because HOW Kable plays the game to make it out was missing. That should have been the most interesting thing about bringing a game to life. Instead, it seems like they tried to balance, or justify, the blood-and-guts with a family angle. Nobody cares about him having a family. Nobody goes to a movie like Gamer to get their heartstrings tugged. The tits and ass for horny teenagers was all gratuitous. The society/ media/ family/ villan/ underground organization/ spoiled kid story line, plus having 2 games, took away from the experience of the combat game. Gerard Butler just looked the part—that was all he brought to it. It failed to deliver any real tension or excitement. In games you have a goal in mind. It was never set up so that you knew where he was going (point A to point B) and what he was up against to get there, nor where the boundaries were on the 'playing field' (so you had some idea if escape was even possible), nor what was outside wherever this was. This should have been an important element so you could gauge his effort/progress. Of course people will try to escape. What's involved? The movie failed miserably to deliver tension in the actual playing of the game. Puking and pissing alcohol just to drive a truck?! That was the best you could do? Big ending.

return to top