Halloween H20 holds a special distinction for being the only DVD I own from a different country. I’m not really sure why I bought it on a trip to Germany over ten years ago since I cannot play it on a normal DVD player and my German is so shoddy now that I would need the dub track. But regardless, I have it on German DVD. I figured starting out the review with a random anecdote would be fine since this is more a technically-competent but superfluous anecdote than a real film in the Halloween series.

Even though Part 5 and 6 had their rough patches here and there, both films had their strong points in the ongoing Michael Myers saga. Halloween 4 was just all around excellent. Yet this Scream-derived soulless grab for nostalgia has the balls to say that everything after Myers and Loomis went up in flames at the end of Part 2 never happened. The main response used against those decrying remakes and reboots is “It’s not like a remake destroys the original.” That certainly is true but H20 does its damnedest to try to erase the old-fashioned slasher films of the 80s and replace them with polished, Creed-filled movies like this. That irritates me.

Now, that isn’t to say that H20 is without merit. Jamie Lee Curtis returning to commemorate the original’s twentieth anniversary was a nice touch as well as the other references and callbacks to the first film. But this one spends three-quarters of its runtime sloppily tracing the structure of the original with some post-modern horror moments sprinkled in occasionally. Say what you will about Druid rituals and random tattoos but at least the preceding films tried something a bit different instead of just rehashing the same stuff but not even close in its effectiveness.

As much as I love it, Scream and its successes pretty much killed the Halloween franchise. Even though it was a slasher film with visible fingerprints from the original Halloween, Scream and this series should not come close to intersecting. Yet, the main problem I have with H20 is that it does not gently merge the existing elements of the series with the popular self-aware teen talk of the 90s as much as it barrels into it. The opening scene (featuring Marion Stephens even though she was barely a bit player before) that is mostly divorced from the rest of the story reeks of studios chasing the money with attractive TV actors and a few false scares but little else. The rest of the film plays out more like a high school drama production of John Carpenter’s Halloween with some hip and edgy dialogue and a puzzling inclusion of a movie that basically acknowledges that Halloween is a movie.

Curtis’ Laurie has significantly more to do this time compared to her last Halloween film but this Laurie never really comes across as genuine like some of the previous characters. Josh Harnett (in his debut film) and Michelle Williams try to class the place up with some decent characters and above-average acting. But their other friends are horribly stock and exist only to give Michael something to do. And this features LL Cool J who was not bad per se (at least not the worst rapper to appear in the series) but was saddled with a stupid and ultimately worthless character as the posh private school’s inattentive security guard. I feel bad for Adam Arkin the most since he is only around to extract exposition from Laurie and get stabbed in the back ala Random Nurse #3 from the second film.

The final act though has some great moments as Laurie goes batshit crazy and locks herself in the compound, calling for Michael. Sadly, this lasts all of about thirty seconds before Michael attacks, Laurie responds and then runs and hides. Perhaps this was a much longer sequence but the film’s impossibly short length leads you to believe that there was a lot cut as the bigwigs demanded less boring stuff like talking or stalking and more action. Another sad casualty of the film was the score by John Ottman which is sliced and diced and intertwined with Marco Beltrami’s Scream music that it is impossible to appreciate. That is if you aren’t a nerd like me and own Ottman’s sadly out-of-print score. I took that CD with me to Germany as well.

Director Steve Miner did exactly what he was hired by the Weinsteins at Dimension to do: make a Scream-esque Halloween movie. Yet, doing so strips any remaining originality from the series and reverts it to just another Scream copycat. At least someone had the foresight to “try” and make this the final film in its closing scene. Yet, I still have Halloween: Resurrection to watch so that was clearly as miscalculated as the rest of this film.

I know. I’ve already reviewed Scream 4 once before. It was hardly an impartial review though since it had been eleven years since the premiere of the preceding movie and it was not too thorough since I banged it out after a midnight showing opening day before going to work. But, since it was just released on DVD and Blu-ray this week, why not take another look?

Beginning with a dizzying number of “opening” sequences, Scream 4 sets the action back in Woodsboro as Sidney (Neve Campbell) has returned on a book signing tour and reunited with Dewey (David Arquette) and Gale (Courteney Cox) who are now married. Dewey is now the Sheriff, Gale is retired from reporting and unsuccessfully trying to write a fiction novel, and Sidney is the proverbial black cat who is constantly followed by death and despair. The mayhem starts up again as Sidney’s cousin Jill (Emma Roberts) and her friend Kirby (Hayden Panettiere) watch as their neighbor is savagely (and I mean savagely!) butchered by Ghostface which kicks in the old plot formula of a who-dun-it mystery combined with unnaturally loquacious teenagers and references to other horror films.

Even though the film was allegedly plagued with rewrites, reshoots, and typical Weinstein fuckery, the finished product that launched in theaters is pretty satisfying. It was announced as a reboot/remake/sequel hybrid which sounded pretty dumb at the time but started to flesh out as the cast was announced with the returning trio of Arquette, Campbell, and Cox and a host of other new characters. The main issue with the film (similar to the last two actually) is that there are too many damn people to keep track of. At this point, we are pretty safe to assume that the killers are not Sidney, Dewey, or Gale so thus every other actor is saddled with questionable lines and sketchy motives to make them seem like the killer. The reason the first worked so well (aside from the fact that it was the first) is that the potential psycho-list was not as long as my arm. You certainly cannot fault the film for a low bodycount though if you are into that.

If anything, returning writer (or writers) Kevin Williamson is able to tap into a good amount of the self-referential and self-awareness of the first film. Woodsboro’s current crop of teens are the gang from the first hopped up on Redbull with unfettered access to the internet to pirate all seven Stab films or whatever the hell kids do these days. Scream: The Next Generation would have been a fine movie on its own. Jill takes the victim torch from Sidney, she has a creepy-ish boyfriend like Billy, and instead of one, we have three Randy-esque characters in this movie. It is the somewhat awkward merging of the old and new classes that brings the film down since there really is no time to focus on anyone for fear of neglecting someone else.

Wes Craven tried to do his best with the film since it seems a bit more on point than part 3 but no where close to the excellence he brought to Scream 2. After enough horror films in general (and of a particular franchise to boot), it is easy to get lazy with the “scares” but there were a few effective ones here and there. The thing I will curse Craven and Williamson (and whoever else wrote the thing) for is their penchant for playing it too safe. There was one scene that almost tried to be as shocking as Randy’s demise in 2 but whoever is responsible didn’t have the cajones to kill off one of the main three. Going into the film, it’s a safe bet that if the character has not been in a previous Scream film, they are as good as dead. It would have been refreshing to have some more uncertainty about the old-school cast even though what the “typical” audience wants is a boring, happy ending.

The most aggravating thing about Scream 4 are the numerous scenes cut from the final picture. Most deleted scenes are taken out for a reason but here are tighter chase scenes, more character development, and backstory that are severely missed in the regular release. Sure, the extra scenes with the sadly wasted Mary McDonnell or more stuff with Kirby (my favorite new character) would have extended the run-time but there was plenty of material that didn’t work to start with. A commentary comes on the Blu-ray with Craven, Roberts, and Panettiere (and Campbell for a brief time) but it is nowhere near as in depth or thoughtful as some of those from the previous films.

The painful thing about Scream 4 is that everyone (cast and crew included) tried hard to make a decent follow-up but only succeeded in reminding the audience how special and awesome the original is. If the series were to continue, it needs to be around some different characters in a similar storyline lest it continue to fall in the shadow of its predecessor.

To my recollection, Scream 3 was the first R-rated movie I “legally” saw in theaters once I was of age. Perhaps that is why I had so many fond memories of it even though the troubled production and distinct lack of the main character had given others a critical leg to stand on. I figured I would like Scream 2 more this time around but the end result was about the same. Would my Scream 3 memories fare any better?

Well, yes and no. By 1999, writer Kevin Williamson had been involved with several Scream-ish productions as well as launching the pinnacle of teen angst, Dawson’s Creek. Thus he was either too busy to return or was burnt out from young adult affairs. Likewise, Neve Campbell was reportedly difficult to nail down for this installment, agreeing to it only with a reduced schedule (and thus reduced screentime). Since the rest of the important cast and crew returned, we have what seems to be a Scream movie, but doesn’t really feel like a Scream movie.

The first lampooned horror movies in general while the second targeted sequels, remakes, and “Based On” movies. Scream 3 focuses on Hollywood as a whole to uneven results. The main crux of the film is based on the production of Stab 3, the second sequel to the film based on the events of the first featured in the second. If you haven’t seen these movies, this won’t make sense. Given that what we saw of Stab was so laughably bad and overacted, it figures that Stab 3 would be full of dull, uninteresting characters who, coincidentally, are on similar trajectories as the characters here.

Writer Ehren Kruger seems to be as aware of the Scream formula as any of the fans. We have the obligatory celebrity death scene up front, then reconnecting with characters we care about, then learning about those we don’t. In the process are some death scenes and some meta-commentary (this time on rewrites and the prospect of being an actor in a horror movie) before a big finale. But instead of injecting some fresh blood into the series, Kruger copies the previous movie, faults and all. Remember that cumbersome cast that no one could really stand out from in the last? It’s back again. Even though there are some decent performances from the likes of Matt Keeslar or Deon Richmond, there are as many completely useless characters that might as well have died in their first frame.

Much to any fan’s enjoyment, Randy (Jamie Kennedy) returns to give the final rules for a trilogy on the reasoning that the film’s random backstory throws the sequel rules out. Considering none of the “concluding horror trilogy” rules apply and they appear in a badly written scene (a random girl can wander on and off a movie set with no one noticing?), his appearance is neat but it doesn’t fit the story at all other than to point out how Kruger can kind of write like Williamson. As evidenced by the sort of cool, yet totally out of place scene when Sidney is dreaming about her dead mother, Kruger is a decent writer but apparently not the right guy for this series.

**SPOILERS HERE. SORRY, I CAN’T AVOID THEM THIS TIME**

The ending is a total mess. Not only is it “inspired” from several other scenes from the series thus far, but the reveal of the killer to be Roman illustrates what is wrong with the movie. Given that Campbell was MIA for much of the movie, she hadn’t previously interacted with Roman. He has to introduce himself be revealing that he orchestrated Billy and Stu from the first and was her half-brother. Yikes. And we thought the motives for the last two were sketchy. At least you could kind of understand where the anger, or just craziness, of Billy and Stu or Micky and Mrs. Loomis were coming from. Roman here just comes off as a little bitch, whining that he didn’t get his way.

**END SPOILERS**

Aside from the asinine final act, the mostly comedic tale has its positives, especially from the likes of the manic Parker Posey as the wannabe Gale Weathers or the sarcastic detective played by Josh Pais. Of course, David Arquette and Courteney Cox return and they mostly take center stage while Sidney is in hiding. Patrick Dempsey as the detective in charge is one of the few sympathetic new characters and one that you actually hope might make it. After the near perfection from the last film, director Wes Craven takes a more restrained approach with nothing incredibly bad but nothing really standing out like the last. There were a few jumps and chase scenes that were done well but given the lackluster script, he might have decided not to give a damn.

It is funny that this review is longer than the previous two because I keep going back and forth on this movie. On one hand, it’s entertaining which is pretty much all that I can hope for on some level. As a random horror film, it is okay but riddled with the contrivances, plot holes, and teleporting killers that you might see in Friday the 13th Part VIII. As a Scream film though, it is a poor copy of the largely better films, even the one rushed into production.

It is notable that for the duration of the Saw series, production company Lionsgate was able to keep banging out a new movie in the series less than a year apart with only two major duds out of seven. After the success of the first Scream, Dimension Films surely was quick to retain writer Kevin Williamson and director Wes Craven for a follow-up that incidentally is set two years after the first. If real time had followed the story time, Scream 2 potentially could have been the best of the series but it comes off feeling very rushed.

Scream 2 does have the distinction of being one of a select few movies where the sequel mostly measures up to the first, albeit in different ways. In fact, some notable people (either Siskel or Ebert*) found this movie more likable than the first. The first film of course was packed with references to horror films throughout but Williamson takes the story of the survivors from the last story and interjects it with clever reminders of why this movie should be pretty bad: it is a sequel to a horror movie after all.

From the almost grandiose opening scene featuring Jada Pinkett Smith as an unlucky movie-goer and the obligatory sequel “rules” from Randy, it is easy to tell that Scream 2 strives to be bigger, meaner, and weightier in its commentary on the talking points from the first: horror films and their effect on the viewing populace. Unfortunately, bigger does not always mean better, especially when the original benefited from a tight cast of characters, a rock solid story and some level of restraint in the proceedings. Now, the sequel suffers from the classic detriments of sequels before and after, namely an excess of everything.

Almost all the issues I had with the film would have been corrected by a bit more editing, either on the script or the movie itself. The main problem is that there are too many characters to deal with. Of course we have the returning survivors Sidney, Gale, Dewey, and Randy but there are also far too many new characters vying for limited screentime from Sid’s new boyfriend Derek (Jerry O’Connell), her roommate Hailee, Randy-esque movie geek Mickey (the even then awesome Timothy Olymphant), and on and on. Even the bit part Cotton Weary (Liev Schrieber) has an expanded role that is effective but still extraneous other than as a potential suspect.

While I enjoyed that the character dynamics were essentially reset from the first with a new group (Randy, Gale, or Dewey could easily be involved this time), it also throws more potential poorly established “suspects” in the mix. And due to the larger cast (even though I enjoyed Sarah Michelle Gellar in her brief role), the reveal of the responsible individual(s) seem very random and haphazardly chosen among the available characters. The killer(s) from the previous film worked so well because they were easily suspected and dismissed several times during the film.

Even though the story is a bit lacking, almost everything else is near perfect. The shots are beautiful, the editing is snappy, and the scenes themselves play out with ease, even if the script tries to undermine that. The overstuffed cast had no bearing on the actors who shined with their somewhat limited roles. Neve Campbell, David Arquette, Courteney Cox, and Jamie Kennedy all click back into their respective roles. Even though she struggled in some places like previously, Campbell plays Sidney as strong, yet broken as she attempts to deal with tragedy around her which leads to an excess of guilt and self-doubt.

I read a review that said Wes Craven directed the hell out of this movie and I couldn’t agree more. I would probably have ranked the production of Scream a solid 7 or 8 but this one gets a full 10. You needn’t look any further than some of the incredibly tense scenes such as Cici in the sorority house or Gale in the recording studio at the end. I have seen this movie countless times and I was on edge during some of these moments. Composer Marco Beltrami returns as well with a sometimes traditional, yet sometimes odd score to accompany the similarly bifurcated tone of the movie. Even Hans Zimmer’s Broken Arrow theme emerges in a distracting but still awesome motif for Dewey.

For most, it seems to be a pretty close race between Scream and Scream 2 for superiority in the franchise thus far. The original sits at an 82% rating on Rotten Tomatoes while the sequel is at 81%. Clearly, it is not as steep of a drop in quality such as Nightmare on Elm Street 2 or Hatchet 2. While there was a lot of potential in the follow up, it did not gel for me as much as the first.

*I would verify which but the site for archived Siskel & Ebert videos has apparently been taken down.

When did parody movies become synonymous with sexist, juvenile, pieces of fucking shit movies? I blame Scary Movie. At its time, Scary Movie was a decent spoof of Scream, I Know What You Did Last Summer, and the other dozens of teen-based horror movies of the late nineties. While it has been several years since I have last seen it, Scary Movie had some legitimately funny sequences in their own right and also as a parody of the referenced movies. So, why is Scary Movie the devil? Because of Jason Friedberg and Aaron Seltzer. In fact, we could go as far back as Spy Hard to blame the decline of the spoof but no one saw that movie anyways.

Apparently after the relative success of Scary Movie, Friedberg and Seltzer decided to take any meager accomplishments they might have had being two of six writers of that film and create a legacy of cinema that represents the very reason that people who read books, plant gardens, or raise hamsters think that movies are crap. Why am I dedicating so much space for two dipshits that would not know funny from a hole in the ground and who are not even related to the production of this film? For one, their “style” of parody was assuredly largely responsible for the creation of this movie. For two, there is little else to say about Stan Helsing.

Stan Helsing is one of those movies that makes you angry to watch. This is not a movie like Platoon of the Dead that was made by some guy with a camcorder with no money and no talent. Stan Helsing was actually released in theaters! And people apparently paid money to see it! If I had not watched this via the Jesusflix, I would have protested, rioted, and set some shit on fire for enduring this movie. In retrospect, I really should have expected as much based on the rating from Netflix, IMDb, Rotten Tomatoes, or any other movie site around but I was stupid enough to watch this movie for the purposes of writing an increasingly angry review of it.

Instead of anything pretending to be a plot, we have a slacker who works in a video store whose name is similar to the vampire hunter from Bram Stoker’s imagination who is lost with his dumbass friends in some fucked up community that is haunted by poor caricatures of famous movie villains. Here we see the famous baddies like Michael Myers, Freddy Krueger, or Leatherface but in poor fashion as they each have just different enough qualities to make them … funny? So Pinhead now has darts and syringes protruding from his head? What an idea! Freddy is not only sporting golden encrusted teeth but also a corkscrew and a lipstick applicator from his glove? What comedic genius came up with this shit? Oh, that would be Bo Zenga, one of the producers of Scary Movie. Have I made my point?

Normally, I attempt to look for some positives in a film. Even for a low-budget production, if the movie fails abysmally, I can admire the director and producer for their steadfastness. In this film, I cannot imagine anyone hear the pitch or even read the script and thought, “This is going to be a fine movie.” It angers me even more that Leslie Nielson is so willing to take a paycheck that he cannot be discriminating about the detritus that he appears in. With the exception of the attractiveness of the two female leads and the sometime chuckle-worthy delivery from Kenan Thompson, there is not a single damn thing about this movie that is worthy about mentioning in blogpost, in person, or even in a fleeting moment in your mind.

This may seem like an unconventional review and I will admit that I do not relish having to endure such an unrelenting awful fucking movie. I now have watched this movie in its entirety. It is too late for me. Save yourself.

It’s no secret that Hollywood plays hard and fast with things like gravity, time, and logic. However, one of the more irritating glaring omissions from the fact-checking process is the age of actors cast to play high schoolers. While researching this article, I came to the sad realization that approximately 70% of people in high school movies are over the drinking age. However, these are the worst offenders in only the movies that I have personally seen that immediately jumped out.

Alan Ruck
Slap a suit and tie on him and 29-year-old Ruck could have conceivably played Ed Rooney in Ferris Bueller’s Day Off.

Gabrielle Union
Its actually a compliment to her as she can almost convincingly pull off a teenager in 10 Things I Hate About You and Bring It On at 28.

Matthew Lillard
Perhaps it was his jovial nature or immaturity that sold him as a high-schooler in Scream at the tender age of 26.

Judd Nelson
It is likely that Bender failed a few grades prior to the events of Breakfast Club but to be a senior at 26 pushes the realm of believability. Just get a GED dude!

Rachel McAdams
Maybe 26 is the sweet spot for going back to high school as McAdams was in Mean Girls. Funny thing that her normal-at-the-time costar Lindsey Lohan was only 18 and look who turned out better.

Judge Reinhold
I will give it to him that he ages quite well that he might have been able to go back to school instead of Fred Savage in Vice Versa instead of being in Fast Times at Ridgemont High at 25.

Alyson Hannigan
I’m going to call on her widow’s peak and band talk as the way she could skirt past common sense appearing in American Pie when she was 25 also.

Shawn Hatosy
Much to my surprise, Hatosy has been fairly busy since his turn at 23 in The Faculty thus killing my MIA post on him. His age actually did him well as I can buy him as a cop (as he is currently on SouthLAnd) over pip-squeak Elijah Wood.

Reese Witherspoon
Between Election and Cruel Intentions, I would choose the former as she looked quite young for being 23 and it was fucking hilarious. Cruel Intentions did have a lesbian kiss though. Damn trade-offs.

After PBF’s rant about Julia Roberts the other day, I began to think about actors that either were once great but have since floundered out or those that I did not initially care for. Sadly, most of these actors are still making movies and collecting large paychecks while I actively avoid anything they are in, regardless of the quality (or lack thereof) of the film.

Katherine Heigl
Granted, my only exposure to her is from Bride of Chucky, Knocked Up, and the small portions of Grey’s Anatomy that I’ve been forced to watch (I shall refuse to link to that), but I don’t understand her appeal. She was mildly funny in Apatow’s Knocked Up but the rest of her resume kill any amount of goodwill that had afforded her. And yet, she has two projects in development and yet another she was just recently attached to star in. From what I’ve seen, she not particularly talented (unless the right people are feeding her lines) and reportedly is kind of a bitch to deal with. Cut her loose Hollywood. Give all of her parts from now on to Danielle Harris.

Michael Cera
Let me start by saying Arrested Development is quite possibly the best TV show ever and Cera fit in quite well with the kooky bunch of Bluths. He was also rather good in Superbad and Juno. But the problem is (and I know I’m not the first one to say this), he falls into the Vince Vaughn trap of playing the same fucking character every time, with some minor tweaks to accommodate the story. And for those somewhat memorable roles, who actually saw Nick and Nora’s Infinite Playlist or Youth in Revolt? And he was (allegedly) holding out on the Arrested Development movie? For what? Playing opposite Jack Black in another movie I have absolutely not interest in seeing? So, the solution is to rotate the roles for shy, awkward, young male roles between Cera and his Jewish cousin Jesse Eisenberg. That way, we get the same performance but neither of them are too burdened.

Tom Cruise
Will someone please tell Tom Cruise to stick with the more risque and off-the-wall gigs like Magnolia or Tropic Thunder? These roles work because no one really expects Tom Cruise to be a foul-mouthed motivational speaker or a foul-mouthed movie executive. Maybe he should stick to raunchy roles. Anyways, no one really wants to see (or judging by box office reports, did) a dramatic turn in fair like Lions for Lambs and Valkyrie. With the exception of the Mission: Impossible bastardization series, there really are not too many recent notable movies for Cruise. Now, I’m not one to hold off-set shenanigans against someone (except for Heigl) but his nuttiness distracts from the good-looking, average Joe roles that he seems most famous for. Maybe divorcing Nicole wasn’t the best play for you, Tom.

Robin Williams
Has Robin Williams ever been funny? He seems marketed as a comedian and may have in fact been at one time in the past but I haven’t seen anything out of him in the past fifteen years to back that up. I will give him props for Conan’s penultimate Tonight Show appearance but RV or License to Wed? These might be fine movies in their own right but IMDb ratings indicate otherwise. In fact, I think he best roles are dramatic turns such as playing the creepy guy in One Hour Photo or as a grieving father on the great defunct show Homicide. Now, I’ll admit I got a mild chuckle out of The Birdcage but I’m going to call that the exception to his past performances. Now, cast him as an Islamic terrorist on 24 and I’ll watch that. Then again, I’d watch it anyways so nevermind.

Eddie Murphy
In reverse chronological order: Imagine That, Meet Dave, Norbit, Daddy Day Care, I Spy, Doctor Dolittle, and my favorite Bevery Hills Cop III. What do all of these films have in common? They suck balls. I think with the exception of playing Donkey in the ever waning Shrek series, Eddie Murphy should not appear on celluloid ever again.

For the record, the car in the image is a Chevrolet Celebrity, the same car Neil Prescott drives in Scream. And its worth more than what I would pay for any of the above mentioned actors.

So, DVDs have been around for over ten years, yet there are still films that were released long ago on VHS that have yet to see the day on DVD. Now, I have lived this long without, but it irritates me that there are still pockets of unrecognized films without proper representation on the digital standard (no, I’m not counting Blu-Ray at this point).

While it was lauded as a groundbreaking “meta” film at the time, some of the luster has worn off Wes Craven’s Scream. However, it is still a highly entertaining exercise in understanding Kevin Williamson’s highly unrealistic teenage dialect wrapped in a pretty decent slasher film. While this film has been on DVD for some time, it is not anamorphic so it looks like crap on my TV in stretch-o-vision and it is even the version trimmed down to appease the dolts at the MPAA. If Paramount can release Event Horizon on DVD three times, surely Dimension can throw a few dollars toward a decent, uncut release of this “classic.”

While it is probably the most maligned of the Halloween series, I’ve always had a special space in my heart for Halloween: The Curse of Michael Myers. One of the reasons it is frowned upon so is due to the chainsaw editing that was done after the film was completed. Many scenes were cut down or reshot all together resulting in a major clusterfuck of a movie. Still, this one had the best autumn atmosphere out of any of the sequels and there were many scenes of greatness trying to sneak through. Yet, all we have is a discontinued bare-bones theatrical version of the movie. Now, I’m not asking for a three hour retrospective documentary on the film, but give me the deleted scenes so I can verify the validity of the claim that while still crap, the movie makes much more sense. Coincidentally, also a Dimension Films release. Hmm …

Maniac Cop 2. I’m not sure what else I need to say about a movie called … Maniac Cop 2 other than its a sequel to a film about a maniac cop which starred Bruce Campbell and Tom Adkins. And this is not on DVD other than on different continents. Does whatever company own this dreck think I don’t want to see a high-def version of the titular character blowing away a police station full of cops or Leo Rossi’s ugly mug? If Starz feels a need to show this and its inferior second sequel, there certainly has to be some demand for a DVD.

While these movies may not represent AFI’s Top 100 list, I demand respect to be paid to these … uh, movies. Fix it, Hollywood!!