National Lampoon's Blackball (2003)

Background: There was a time when the National Lampoon name held weight. It all started back in 1970 with a magazine, a nationwide offshoot of the Harvard Lampoon which had began publication a full century earlier. It was beloved throughout the '70s for pushing well past what was considered appropriate. The National Lampoon empire quickly expanded through the mid part of the decade to include books, live theater, radio, etc. Most notably though, they also started making movies. 1978 saw the release of their first, and probably still best, movie Animal House. A few years later came National Lampoon's Vacation, which gave rise to other, crummier sequels. Eventually, after all the original editors had long since taken expensive buyouts, the magazine's popularity declined. It struggled through financial troubles through the '80s and '90s until it printed its final issue in 1998.

Since then, another company has emerged, called National Lampoon Inc. Founded in 2002, it sought to make the National Lampoon brand relevant again. They quickly scored a hit with the Ryan Reynolds vehicle Van Wilder, so they made more college comedies. Dorm Daze, Barely Legal, and a sequel to Van Wilder are among the lowbrow, direct to DVD movies they've made since the company formed, which brings us to today's entry from The Depths, Blackball from 2003.

The movie features big names like Vince Vaughn and James Cromwell, but still barely saw a release in America. 

Plot: Cliff Starkey is a brash, young lawn bowling prodigy from England. That may not seem like a big deal, but in the world of Blackball, Bowls is king. Cliff is loud and vulgar, and this offends other bowlers, as it is traditionally a proper game played by old people. His hijinks start when he yells "Tosser" at the stuffy head of the Bowls club and main antagonist for most of the movie, Ray Speight (James Cromwell). The other antagonists are the Australian national Bowls team. They've already taken down South Africa and America, and Starkey immediately thinks he can beat them no problem. Starkey also has a fat friend, whom I will refer to as only "Fat Friend". His only role in the movie is to be the Fat Friend, including a "joke" where the camera zooms in on his jiggling belly.

In order to have the right to play for the England national Bowls team, he first has to win a local tournament. His first opponent was described as "Young" and "Dangerous", but he is instead in his mid forties and smokes a funny looking pipe. He takes them down in short order. His showy antics quickly catch on with the crowd (way too quickly to be believable, really), and he has them going crazy throughout the rest of the tournament. The final match is against Ray Speight, naturally, and Starkey comes out with a marching band playing the Rocky theme, albeit quite poorly. Starkey wipes the floor with him. One problem though, on his scorecard he writes "Ray Speight is a tosser". this vulgarity gets him banned from the sport for 15 years.

The ban makes big news around England, grabbing headlines in The Times and other big papers. As his star rises, he's contacted by a sports agent played by Vince Vaughn. This story goes exactly nowhere and by the end of the film, Vaughn is no where to be seen. In the meantime though, Starkey signs a big contract and plays exhibition Bowls on television. Through his stardom, he hurts Fat Friend emotionally, and his father figure gets hurt physically.

All this leads to his eventual reinstatement into professional bowls so he can play the Aussie team. Cliff's partner on the team? Speight, of course. Those two really hate each other now due to a scandal involving Cliff dating Speight's daughter. That whole plot line was awful, so I tried to avoid it. Cliff struggles at first and the Aussies jump out to what seems to be an insurmountable lead. Of course though, Cliff gets his groove back, England wins the championship and everyone lives happily ever after.

Why Was It Forgotten? The plot of the movie is basically that of Happy Gilmore. A rough young guy trying to break into the world of a button up sport. All the other players hate him, but all the fans love him. It doesn't have anywhere near the charm though. Sure, Adam Sandler's idiot manchild schtick isn't without its faults, but at least he was looking out for other people. He was playing for his grandma and his mentor, but Starkey plays most of the movie purely for himself, and that lack of compassion makes for a much less interesting character.

There's also the angle of making a small sport big. Like Dodgeball: A True Underdog Story, it takes a silly little game with no real competitive base, and creates a universe where it's immensely popular, with big sponsorships and national television deals. However, as with the last comparison, it's way worse. Dodgeball acknowledges its silliness by putting it on ESPN 8, but there's no sign of either wink or nod in this movie. There are further eerie similarities with Dodgeball, including a sudden death round involving a silver ball.

Also, Fat Friend sucks.

What Went Right? Though it may pale in comparison to other movies like it, there are some good jokes to be found in the movie. The strange world that's been created where popular newspapers will have top headlines about Bowls is fun to spend some time in. Also, even though I went into the movie with only a vague knowledge of lawn bowling, a good licensed soundtrack (songs from Queen and The Who) actually manages to make the low key sport interesting and fun to watch. It's a shame that the actual games are so few and far between.

Verdict: The National Lampoon name is far from resurrected.

Score: 35%

Follow The Depths Of Netflix on Twitter: @DepthsOfNetflix

Girl Groups - Story Of A Sound (1983)

Background: This is a documentary about girl groups in the '60s, a small genre that I'm extremely fond of. I'm gonna be perfectly honest here, I can't find a lot of evidence that this even exists. The only written history I can find is actually a review on Amazon that the director, Steve Alpert wrote. He tells tales of trying to get clearances for clips from ABC that they didn't know they even had and going to Detroit in a blizzard to find clips from their local version of American Bandstand, called "Teen Town". The movie was made over the course of a long, stressful year for Alpert. Like all documentaries, he found himself struggling to find the narrative in all the elements that he shot.

One of the more interesting stories Alpert gets into in the Amazon review is where he responds to another user's review. That previous reviewer said that the part of the film that covers The Supremes went on too long, and surprisingly Alpert agrees. Turns out that had to do with how Motown licensed their songs back when this movie was made (1982). That is to say Motown didn't license their songs back then. The only way they could work it is if they licensed a package of 10 songs.

Oddly Netflix has no box art for this, which is a shame, because the box art is awesome.

Plot: The doc starts with the writing of the classic "My Boyfriend's Back", a hit for The Angels back in 1963. We learn the story through writer/producers Bob Feldmen and Richard Gottehrer, the latter of whom also wrote "I Want Candy". From here we're taken on a whirlwind tour of 60's girl group pop. The singers point to one particular inspiration, Frankie Lymon's Why Do Fools Fall In Love. They looked at Frankie, only 13 at the time, and said they can do that too, and thus many girl groups were born. 

It's pretty much straight history lesson for a while, playing hits from The Shirelles , The Dixie Cups and more. The songs, like the voices of the singers are big and catchy. Mostly, this portion of the movie is devoted to the singers saying how much they love the other singers. There are a few more interesting moments with the songwriters too, including the brief mention of George Morton, nicknamed "Shadow". He was known for writing the darker songs of the era. It's sort of refreshing to hear a more moody song in the midst of the bubblegum pop that fills the rest of the movie.

The hit parade then marches straight into the reign of Phil Spector. That name rings with an infamous tone these days, only a few years ago he was convicted of 2nd degree murder. Even back then he was described in one sentence as "Strange, lovable [and] frightening". Ronnie Spector, at one time his wife, has some crazy stories to tell about her time with him. There's no denying his talents for production though.

The movie certainly does spend a lot of time on The Supremes, and though there is some very interesting drama in that group, I frankly just don't care for them. The dynamics of the group are pretty well known at this point, first being The Supremes, then Donna Summer and The Supremes and then Donna Summer springing out on her own, it doesn't seem too necessary to spend a lot of time on them. The movie closes out with them and the beginning of the british invasion, which changed the music industry away from the genre of girl groups.

Why Was It Forgotten? As a documentary, it functions more as a hit parade than an actual story. The hits are infections and instantly recognizable, sure, but the film lacks a certain depth. There is nothing on the deeper cuts of the girl groups, only the most popular songs are featured. It's these for unknown tracks that formed the Northern Soul movement in Britain, which may not be terribly well known, but it would be interesting to see more of what happened because of the girl groups and not just what people know already.

Also, the racial nature of the music is only barely touched upon in one sentence at the very end of the movie. The '60s were a very tumultuous time for the civil rights movement for African Americans and the fact that all these hits were being churned out by black singers at a time of extreme racial tension in the country would have made for an interesting plot line.  Even more interesting is that most of the songs mentioned in this movie were written by white males, but sung black women, again, this point is never even mentioned.

What Went Right? The movie hits every mark that it aims for. The music is fun and still holds up to this day. Anyone with even a remote interest in this kind of music will know the words to every song, many of them have become iconic to anyone that know music at all. It gives a great, varied history about the makings of girl groups and gives backgrounds on the people that wrote the songs. You rarely hear about the people behind the scenes so it's always fun to find out more about those guys. The only real downside of the movie is that only does what it aims for, and doesn't let the plot of the documentary grow and breathe and change as a good doc will.

Verdict: A fun, infectious look back at a time in music I (and Martin Scorsese) will always hold dear

Score: 80%

Queen Of Blood (1966)

Background: Queen Of Blood is a bit of an oddity. It was made in 1966 with almost no budget. Because of these monetary restrictions, many of the scenes in the movie are lifted from two Soviet movies, Mechte Navstrechu and Nebo Zovyot. The former got little attention stateside, but the latter was released stateside as Battle Beyond The Sun. Roger Corman picked up the rights to the American release (naturally) and tasked young up-and-coming film student Francis Ford Coppola (perhaps you've heard of him) with Americanizing it. Not only did he get rid of all the Anti-American propaganda, but he also added a few new scenes with two martians, intentionally created to look like genitalia. Because it was the '60s, and it was Roger Corman, that's why.

The American cast of Queen of Blood is actually fairly intriguing. First listed is John Saxon, who most people will know as the cocky white guy from Enter The Dragon. Joining him is Basil Rathbone, long time Sherlock Holmes from the series of movies from the '40s. Rounding out the big names is Dennis Hopper, probably best known as King Koopa from Super Mario Bros. Also other, better things.

Plot: This movie starts at the Space Institute (that's right, Space Institute) in the far flung future of 1990. Man has set up space stations on the moon by now and the Space Institue is picking up a mysterious signal. The scientists at the Space Institute (I can't stop saying it because it's so ridiculous) have picked up a mysterious signal. It sounds like mostly random noise, but they think it might be a message from an alien race. And they're right! Codebreakers figured out that it meant that they're going to send an ambassador to Earth.

Problems arise when the alien ship never makes it to Earth, but rather crash lands on Mars instead. The Space Institute sends a rescue team over, but that hits some problems too. They run into a massive sunburst and it jostles their ship around long enough to make one crew member pass out and burns more fuel than expected. They do find the ship that lands, but it only contains one dead passenger.

The fuel situation on the Earth ship means they have to send another crew to lend a hand. That ship lands on Phobos, a moon of Mars, where they find another ship that crashed there. This one has a living passenger, a green skinned girl with gold hair. Not like golden blonde, but actually shiny, metalic gold. They bring her over to Mars to help the first ship, where she kills a crew member and drinks his blood. Because she's the Queen Of Blood! Get it? They figure out that she drinks blood and they feed her from the ship's supply of plasma (You travel with buckets of blood in your car, don't you?). When that runs out, shit gets real.

Why Was It Forgotten? Because of the nature of the film, being culled from multiple sources with varying budgets, it is a tremendously uneven watch. The Soviet parts are typical of Soviet sci-fi of the time, reminiscent of Andrey Tarkovskly's films. Those scenes are deliberately paced and very moody, big sets and colored lighting. The american parts however, are filmed on crummy sound stages on cheap sets with a few flashing lights on control panels. Though they look way worse, the American scenes are filmed on much much better film stock than their soviet counterparts. This creates a very jarring shift when the film goes back and forth from Soviet to American. In the most egregious of these examples, a wide shot will be of the soviet footage and then it will go to a close up from America, on a set that only vaguely resembles the wide shot.

It's a shame the general crumminess of the visuals from America are in such stark contrast with the foreign scenes. Throwing a few extra dollars at some real sets would have gone a long way to making this movie a lot more watchable. There are also a few times where it's obvious that they had spare footage from the Soviet films and just wanted to use it to pad out the story.

What Went Right? Well, the story might be fairly generic, but the visuals from the Soviet films are striking and moody. I loved every moment they were on the screen. They were rich and varied with interesting lighting and a certain deliberateness to the pacing that the American parts of the movie are missing. It's just a shame that the entire movie couldn't have had the same production values as these parts.

That said, there is a certain campy charm to the local scenes. The budget sets and hammy acting may be an acquired taste, but I, like many others, grew up watching Mystery Science Theatre 3000. The messy but fun attitude is just another way the two sources of this movie are so disjointed, but on the whole, this movie is a pretty fun watch.

Verdict: Like watching two movies at the same time, what a value!

Score: 85%

Follow The Depths Of Netflix on Twitter: @DepthsOfNetflix

Twelve (2010)

Background: There's no denying that Joel Schumacher was once one of the biggest directors in Hollywood. The Lost Boys, Falling Down, the lesser Batman movies of the 90's and Phonebooth which I liked a lot more than just about every one else I talk to. Then came The Number 23, a numerological thriller starring Jim Carrey. The movie did okay, making back double its budget worldwide, but was savaged in the media. Schumacher's career was damn near killed by the one movie, sure no one liked those Batman movies he did, but if you look back on it, those weren't entirely his fault. His next movie, Blood Creek, saw only a limited release, and Twelve opened in less than 250 screens. It made an average of about $475 on those screen. I'll just tell you right now, that's terrible.

The movie is based on a novel by Nick McDonell. It's notable because it was published when McDonell was only 17 years old. It was adapted by first time screenwriter Jordan Melamed and let me tell you, it seems like he tried to keep every word of the source material.

Twelve certainly never wanted for star power. It's got Chace Crawford, hottie from Gossip Girl, right on the poster. It has 50 Cent, Lenny Kravitz's daughter Zoë, Emma Roberts and even the youngest Culkin, Rory. Yet Crawford has never parlayed his TV success into big Hollywood roles, his biggest being maybe The Haunting Of Molly Hartley. Maybe. How could this many stars fall down the rabbit hole?

Plot: This is going to be tricky because there is just an awful lot of plot in this movie. And way too many characters. Let's start off with those. White Mike (Crawford) is a drug dealer, his cousin is Charlie, Hunter is his best friend, Molly is the girl his romantic interest he has to shield from his drug dealing lifestyle, Lionel (50 Cent) is his supplier. Sara Ludlow is the hottest girl in school, she has a boyfriend but I can't remember his name. Chris (Rory Culkin) is an impressionable young rich kid, Claude is his unstable meathead brother straight out of rehab. Jessica is... someone. Tobias is a model, discovered on the beach, buys weed from White Mike. There's a kid with the nickname of Mark Rothko because he, while on a trip to The Met, tore Rothko's #12 (Rothko's #12 is not on display at The Met. #13 is, but the name of the movie is Twelve so he knocked into #12). Got it? Okay, let's see some plot.

To start, 12 is the name of a new drug. I'm always leery of things that make up new drugs. Especially when the drug has as dumb a name as 12. We learn all this through a narrator (Kiefer Sutherland, another star!) White Mike is an upper class drug dealer, mostly selling pot to rich kids. He doesn't drink or do drugs at all, a total straight arrow. He started selling drugs after his mom died of cancer. We also meet the girls of the movie early on and it's easy to tell that the writer was probably very unpopular in high school. Every girl is a manipulative asshole who only talk about what party they're going to tonight and how manipulative they are

Charlie is hooked on 12, tries to rob Lionel who takes Charlie's gun and shoots and kills him. Hunter gets in a fight with his dad and wanders off into the night, all night long. Because his unknown whereabouts and little else Hunter is taken in by the police for suspicion of killing Charlie, despite only vague circumstantial evidence and no motive to speak of.

The main story revolves around this big party for Sara Ludlow's birthday. She uses her good looks to manipulate Chris, whose parents are away, to throw her a party. A famous party, as in one to make her famous at school. She has a boyfriend, but that doesn't stop her. Along the way, Jessica gets hooked on 12, Claude gets rejected by his and Chris' mom, Molly remains in love with White Mike. Molly gets invited to the party by Tobias (his only reason for being in the movie). Jessica ends up selling her viginity to Lionel for more 12, White Mike walks in on them getting it on, looking for Molly. Lionel pulls a gun on White Mike, Charlie's gun in fact, which he kept for some reason and White Mike discovers he killed Charlie. White Mike gets shot once or twice, not sure. Claude loses it and shoots some more people, including White MIke again and kills Lionel, eventually getting taken down by the cops. Molly rebuffs White Mike when she learns he's a dealer. That's pretty much it. There's a lot more, but it's not important.

Why was it forgotten? There's just too goddamn much plot. There are about 1,000 characters too many and very few of them are memorable or even useful to the plot. The narrator ruins every piece of momentum the movie might ever have with overwrought prose delivered like a hard boiled noir-style detective. A movie like this almost seems like a first time director's overly earnest piece that he wants to put out there to make a name for himself, which is why it's so confusing that it was directed by an erstwhile heavyweight like Schumacher. None of the characters are relatable and they're certainly not well acted. Just a goddamned mess.

What went right? Shockingly little. The best I can say is that it's watchable.

Verdict: That doesn't mean you actually should watch it though.
Score: 3%

An Essay From The Depths Pt. 2 of 2

The furor may have died down over the Netflix pricing scheme in the week or so since it was introduced, but there's no doubt there will be some fallout in the long run. Business Insider has said that as many as 41% of their users plan on canceling the service. though it should be said that this poll isn't entirely scientific. It was taken in the immediate reaction to the announcement and only a specific sampling of their users. The site even admitted that the poll was informal. A similar poll by Geekwire said their 33% of their users would be sending back their red envelopes for good. In both polls, very few users said they'd keep the DVDs and Streaming options.

This is hardly the first time the internet has gone to the mattresses over having to pay for things. The heady days of yore now known as the Napster era was lousy with stories like this. People had long used the internet to circumvent copyright laws, but Napster took it to the mainstream. All you had to do was type in "Metalica" and you could piss off Kirk Hammett in seconds, and many many people did just that. It was very obviously against the law, but no one cared. Piracy is cool and laws aren't. It's a simple fact of life.

After Napster was shut down, a thousand other services sprung up in its stead. Morpheus, Limewire, Kazaa, Soulseek and other programs with other terrible names remained the bane of the recording industry for years. They were untouchable, so the Recording Industry Artists of America had to go after the users themselves, and RIAA became a four letter word. Shortly after this whole mess, the iTunes music store launched, sold billions of songs, and people started focussing more on the RIAA's other legion of problems. Piracy remains a problem in music, but with so many other ways to get music, legally and cheaply, the issue has been largely swept away.

Another infamous tale of internet entitlement happened recently in the world of gaming. A few months ago, Sony announced that it would no longer allow users to install Linux onto their PS3s. This might be very confusing to some people, but let's oversimplify it to "It would make it easier to play pirated games". Sony, learning nothing from the RIAA, went after users who downloaded program that allowed Linux on the PS3 after all. Hackers broke into the Playstation Network and started rooting around in their databases, where millions of peoples' credit card information was kept. Sony pulled the plug on their network and all PS3s remained offline for weeks. Piracy has been a big problem of their handheld system, the PSP and Sony was trying to protect their flagship console, albeit in a sort of scummy way.

Games on the PC have been hit so hard with the pirate bug that many game companies either don't develop for the PC anymore or just don't expect to make money on them. Cliff Blezinski of Epic Games has said that piracy is the reason he doesn't want his high end games to be on the PC at all saying "The persons who is savvy enough to [...] have a good PC is a person who is savvy enough to know all the elements so they can pirate software. Steam, a program where people can legally pay for and download games instantly, has recently helped make PC games relevant again. Now individual publishers like Blizzard and Electronic Arts, have their own systems in place like Steam and the environment is getting better and better for game developers

The point of all this is that people are willing to pay for their content if it is made available to them quickly and easily. Most people don't want to steal, but do so because it's the easiest way to get the things they want, and people love easy things. Netflix is just about the easiest way to get movies there is. but people are still up in arms about the price. On Demand services are clearly the way things are heading for the movie industry, but they don't seem to know it. Speculation has it that one reason for the price increase is because when Netflix has to renew their deals with the studios, the price will be significantly higher. If Netflix can't renew these contracts and those studios' catalogs disappear from the service, it's not a hard line to draw to increased piracy.

Now you can follow the Depths on Twitter!
Follow @depthsofnetflix today!

An Essay From The Depths Pt. 1 of 2

On Tuesday, as I'm sure you've heard, Netflix announced that they were splitting their Streaming and DVD-By-Mail services. With each costing $7.99/month, this essentially amounts to a 60% rate hike for one of their most popular services, it's the subscription I and many people I know use. Needless to say, this created quite a stir on the internet, many people saying they will either cancel their DVD-By-Mail plans or even tossing Netflix out the window all together. This is the sort of reactionary craziness that you only find on the internet.

Before Netflix, there was cable. Remember cable? No, because you have Netflix now and the only reason to turn on the TV is for news (which you get on the internet) and sports (which you can get on your Xbox 360 or computer). Cable started as an ad-free subscription that offered little more than rerun network shows, specialty channels and softcore pornography. Then ads started sneaking in. Advertisers didn't want to be associated with smut, and so the porn went away. Advertiser dollars kept rolling in, and cable channels started producing higher and higher quality original programming, and those specialty channels were able to raise production values and gain more viewers. Now, ESPN is one of the richest businesses on television and cable channels are winning more and more Emmys every year.

This brings us to the Netflix era. Netflix started way back in 1998 with a pay-per-rental model, like those seen in regular rental stores. Not long after, it introduced the now ubiquitous subscription plan and cancelled the original pay scheme. This is what made Netflix really take off, and that's what makes the story really begin. Before long, Netflix was looking to expand.

They opened up a distrobution house called Red Envelope Entertainment, named after the signiature red envelopes they mail their DVDs in. They released over 100 movies, including the acclaimed documentaries This Film Is Not Yet Rated and Born Into Brothels, the less acclaimed, though controversial doc, Super High Me and foreign films like 4 Months, 3 Weeks, 2 Days. These films, due to their subject matter or lack of commercial viability, might otherwise have never seen the light of day. Red Envelope Entertainment was closed down in 2008 due to pressure from other distributors. It was their first foray into adding to the world of entertainment, something they've been revisiting lately.

When Netflix started their "Watch Instantly" program, the company became a revolution. People could now watch anything Netflix had licensed within seconds on their computers (later moving to just about every internet connection device with a video-out port). They signed deals with Starz to bring current programming to the system, and Paramount to get their films shortly after their DVD release. Every few weeks, a story is posted about Netflix's next big signing. Now, some estimates have Watch Instantly streaming up to 30% of the nation's bandwitdth at peak hours.

Bandwidth, as anyone with AT&T U-Verse, Comcast and a growing number of ISPs with monthly data caps can tell you, comes at a cost. Netflix has made it easier and easier to use more and more of their bandwidth, though. When the streaming plan started, you could watch 1 hour of streaming video for every dollar spent on the DVD plan. A $15/month plan meant you could watch 15 hours of content per month. Netflix has dropped that. Up until recently, you had to get DVDs in the mail in order to get access to the Watch Instantly archives. Netflix dropped that too with the addition of the $7.99 streaming only plan. All this has led to, as of April 2011, a staggering 23.6 million subscribers in the US and Canada alone. That equals a lot of scratch.

But bandwidth aside, where does all the money go? Well, estimates say the company spends close to $1 billion in shipping out their DVDs. The previous postage rate hike cost Netflix $50 million per year, but that's not what makes headlines. Netflix is now going through a transformation, turning into a real network, just like all those cable channels from years ago. They signed a big money deal for two 13 episode seasons of House Of Cards, a show from David Fincher and Kevin Spacey, outbidding established networks like AMC and HBO. This would be the first time they've funded an original production, and it's clear that they're betting quite a bit on it. They also recently signed a deal for exclusive rights to past episodes of acclaimed AMC show Mad Men for $2 million per episode. No one complains when Netflix spends money, but everyone complains when they ask for some more.

In short, rate hikes are an inevitable part of the business. Netflix has to pay for pay for a lot of things, and with increases like this, it means they have more money to spend on more things. It's clear Netflix isn't shy about spending money to provide content to its users. Whether it's signing new deals or finally putting captions on the content that's already available, the money probably won't be going towards the depths I gleefully trawl. 

I've been a subscriber for years and will continue to be a subscriber with the same plan, despite the increased rate. I've never received a bad disc and I've never gotten those discs even a day late. Redbox, those kiosks at the checkouts of grocery stores and the like may be the way to go for some, but if you want a back catalogue or TV shows, Netflix remains the best option out there.

Monday: The Internet and Entitlement.

Also, you can follow The Depths Of Netflix on twitter!@DepthsOfNetflix

Deadfall (1968)

Background: Today we plunge again into the depths of Michael Caine, this time with Italian actress Giovanna Ralli and the Tony nominated Eric Portman. Caine was still making a name for himself at this point. He had already made Alfie (in a role later ruined by Jude Law) but hadn't yet done The Italian Job (A role late ruined by Mark Wahlberg). This was written and directed by Bryan Forbes, known for classics like Seance On A Wet Afternoon and The Stepford Wives (Later Ruined by Frank Oz and Paul Rudnick). How could a movie with a cast and crew that spawned so many crummy remakes be so forgotten?

Also, it should be said that the stream quality is really not very good. First off, it's 4:3, instead of widescreen 16:9. This might sound nit-picky, but it looks odd in a movie, even before the HD days, I always preferred widescreen. Also, the sound quality is downright awful. It's loud in places and quiet in others, and it all sounds like it was recorded on a decades old cassette tape and then left in a hot car until now. So I apologize in advance if I miss any important story beats. It's very dialogue heavy and the dialogue isn't the easiest to understand, especially with Ralli's accent.

Plot: The movie starts out very strong with a rip off James Bond into. It's got a torch singer and stylized titles. However, instead of dancing ladies in neat colors, it's birds. Yep,  birds. It should be noted that birds play no part in any other part of the movie.

When the movie actually starts, Henry Clarke (Michael Caine) is a recovering alcoholic with the creepiest german doctor ever. While in recovery, he buddies up with a guy, exchanges a few jokes, and we're not sure why just yet we're being shown this. While getting a massage, Clarke meets Ms. Fé Moreau. They go for a walk and talk about Clarke's past. Though they don't come right out and say it, they talk in code about his past as a thief, saying he takes "photos" instead of "cash and diamonds". Pretty sneaky. It becomes quickly apparent that Clarke and Fé are going to do it before the movie is through.

That is until we meet Fé's husband, Richard. Richard offers Clarke a scotch and he accepts (not taking the alcoholism recovery very seriously). Turns out Richard knows Clarke faked his alcoholism to get into recovery to get closer to that other man. And that other man has diamonds.

First though, Clark and the Moreaus plan another heist. And let me tell you, this one goes down as one of my favorite heists in movie history. it cuts between the theft and an orchestra with a solo guitarist. The score really shines in this portion. The music swells during particularly dramatic parts and the the more technical parts are score by the guitar. It's great and really fun to watch and listen to.

After this, the movie takes a hard turn into character drama. Richard is gay, and Clarke has fallen for Fé hard (if you know what I mean). Richard as it turns out, was also a Nazi and did some bad things during WWII, as Nazis were wont to do. Fé only married him out of pity, she felt he needed someone to forgive him. The entire second half of the movie drags terribly, to be honest.

It closes with another heist, this time thieving from the man that Clarke met while in recovery. It ends just about as badly as a heist can, with Michael Caine dying. Thankfully no real heist has ended with that yet. A true tragedy indeed.

Why Was It Forgotten? Frankly, the second half of the movie doesn't work at all. The first half, the heist section, doesn't build any connection to characters, they're merely the people perpetuating the really cool crime. A great heist is never about the people doing the stealing, but the actual theft itself. Michael Caine, still in the supercool phase of his career, plays the heist part perfectly. Unfortunately, the entire second half of the movie is character driven and the first half built exactly no connection to any character whatsoever.

It also doesn't help that this movie is a product of its time. It has the freer sexual notions of the 60's with Richard being openly gay, and his wife free to lay with other men. Also, the bathrobes, featured in several scenes, are short enough to seem gauche in modern society. It seems strange to say it, but even the fact arising that Richard was a Nazi seems to have lost a lot of its punch lately. In post WWII England, it was still quite the sore spot, but these days, society seems to have lost their interest in such things. Communists, terrorists, etc.

What Went Right? The first half of the movie is a blast. It sets itself apart from other heists with only the addition of an interesting soundtrack, but that soundtrack works incredibly well. It's a shame that the music turns far more typical in the second half of the movie, another thing that leads to it being far less interesting than the first half.

Michael Caine, as always, is a joy. One of his best qualities is that he always gives his best performance no matter what the material. His character was the same as in any movie of this sort. Smarmy, smooth, wise cracking, etc. but he brings extra to the scenes where he's desperate. Both of his heists run into trouble, and its there that he shines. Worry is a rare emotion in heist movie protagonists and Caine pulls it off well.

Verdict: Two hours long, one hour good.

Score: 50%

The Hollywood Sign (2001)

Background: Burt Reynolds, Tom Berenger and the venerable Rod Steiger star in this 2001 Hollywood satire/heist thriller. The three play basically fictionalized versions of themselves, now on the back end of their acting careers, both in real life and in the movie. This was one of Rod Steiger's last roles before his death in 2002, but he certainly hadn't slowed down leading up to this role. He made at least three movies every year throughout the '90s, topping out at nine credits in 1996. Burt Reynolds wasted no time squandering all the good will afforded him by his eye opening role in 1997's Boogie Nights, starring in several TV movies and not a lot else. Tom Berenger's career has always been more about quantity over quality, though he did have memorable roles in Major League and, earlier in 2001, Training Day. 

The writer, Leon de Winter (who adapted his own book into this script), and Director, Sönke Wortmann, are Dutch and German, respectively. This is particularly notable because this is, at it's core, a Hollywood satire, though neither have much of any experience in Hollywood proper.

Plot: The movie opens with Berenger and Reynolds (both of their characters have names, but you'll always just think of them as Tom Berenger and Burt Reynolds) are working together on a movie directed by Garry Marshall. It appears to be a buddy cop movie, which is the exact opposite of the type of movie Garry Marshall usually makes. The shoot goes poorly, so poorly in fact that a boozing Burt crashes his car on purpose, just to mess everything up. It's after this that Berenger's girlfriend tells Tom that she's in talks to sell her script, called The Hollywood Sign,  and would have no trouble doing so if she changes the ending to be happier. This point is hammered home throughout the movie, because that's what Hollywood satires do.

Years later, the careers of Burt and Tom have tanked, to the point where Berenger applies and interviews for a job selling used cars. This subplot has absolutely no impacts on the movie and is pushed to the side and forgotten about only a few scenes later. Around this time, Berenger gets it into his head that he's gonna produce The Hollywood Sign himself. He secures a small amount of funding, which falls through when the person doing the funding gets unceremoniously hit by a truck. At the funeral, old friends Burt and Tom are joined by Steiger, an older, Oscar winning actor. They all go drinking by the Hollywood sign and there they find a body.

Steiger recognizes the body as someone with some gangsters. Turns out they stole some money from a casino with the help of Berenger's now-ex girlfriend.The plot gets really convoluted for a good long time, though it does eventually explain itself, somewhat. The three amigos want the gangster's cash to fund a new movie and the heist is underway. There's an awful lot of plot in this movie that unfurls at a sometimes glacial pace, but you get the gist of it.

Also, the ending is really stupid and doesn't make a whole lot of sense, but that doesn't really matter, most people would never get that far into the movie.

Why Was It Forgotton: Well, the movie only saw a DVD release here in the States, and none of the names on the box hold a lot of sway anymore. Though each of the three leading men had their heydays, they are long past. It should also be said that even though this movie came out in 2001 on a fairly small budget, the actual visual quality of the movie seems early 90's at best. Particularly egregious though, is the soundtrack. which is laughably overwrought and consistently overbearing. It turns a potentially touching scene where Reynolds watches an old VHS tape (Man, remember VHS tapes? 2001, man) of an old western in which he starred into an eye roller.

It should also be said that the direction is virtually nonexistent. The camera shoots what's going on in the story and that's it, really. Of the three leads, only Steiger seems to be enjoying himself. Burt Reynolds has clearly given up on trying, and Berenger is acting with reckless abandon, the supposed "straight man" in this supposed "comedy"

It should be said as well that this movie has some real strange stuff in it. Like at the producer's funeral, one of the people there to mourn is Whoopie Goldberg. She's in the movie for maybe five seconds and says nothing, never to be seen again. Also, there are a few references specifically to the film company Paramount. Paramount had absolutely nothing to do with this picture.

What Went Right? Steiger is genuine joy to watch. His performance is lively and his dialogue clever, much more so than the rest of the movie, really. Also, looking back on the plot, it is pretty clever, even if it unfolds in a way that no mere mortal can follow. That's pretty much all the went right.

Verdict: Still probably better than An Alan Smithee Film: Burn Hollywood Burn

Score: 15%

Armstrong (1996)

Background: To Celebrate the 4th Of July, the Depths Of Netflix celebrates the 1998 film Armstrong. Only America can make a big dumb action movie with this much sincerity. Menahem Golan directs this picture, and while he may be unknown to most, he is a God among '80's action aficionados. He produced such classics as The Delta Force with Chuck Norris, Over The Top and Cobra with Sly Stallone, Bloodsport, easily Jean-Claude Van Damme's best movie and even Death Wish 2-5. He even directed those first two. His career waned considerably after these movies, he kept making movies like this long after they fell out of fashion.

It's safe to say that the cast is not the big selling point for this movie, but really, who watches action flicks for the acting? The film's production company, Nu Image, has considerably more sway though. Nu Image was founded by another action super-producer Avi Lerner, whose credits include Rambo, cult favorite Bad Lieutenant: Port Of Call New Orleans and action supergroup smash The Expendables.

Plot: Our movie starts in Russia, as generals and dignitaries discuss nuclear policies. That's when we get our first glimpse of the eponymous hero, Rod Armstrong (Best action hero name ever). He busts in, breaks some glass, shoots some guns and doesn't care about the consequences. But wait! The man at the head of the table, General Zukov, pulls out a stop watch. It was all a test. Armstrong, as it turns out, is an ex-Navy SEAL looking for a job training KGB agents. He's hired, despite saying multiple times that he's "very expensive".

From America comes the man who trained Armstrong, Bob Zorkin and his wife Susan, whom Bob has also trained in the ways of the SEAL. He has a video that he needs to show Armstrong, but just as he's going to, some dudes break into Armstrong's apartment, guns blazing. The leader of the group, a man with a ponytail who's named "Ponytail" (I shit you not) murders Bob and tries to get the tape back from Armstrong.

The tape, as it turns out, is of nuclear missiles being loaded and unloaded at a Russian Military camp being overseen by General Zukov. Ponytail is buying and selling those missiles. The first two paragraphs of this plot summary happen in 20 minutes. Those past two sentences take up the rest of the movie. Pacing problems.

Why Was It Forgotten? This movie was made in 1998. Action movies like this had fallen about of favor about a decade prior. That's not to say there weren't plenty of movies like this throughout the '90s, but by this time they had been largely relegated to Direct To Video. The rise of the indie movie caused a shift in the way Americans viewed big, dumb action flicks. For reference, this movie came out the same year as Rushmore, Life Is Beautiful and Shakespeare In Love.

Another thing to fall out of favor was Russia. For nearly half a century, the Russians were the biggest baddies America could find. Unfortunately for this movie, that period ended several years prior to its release, though it seems no one told the movie. All army vehicles and weapons are emblazoned with a red star, usually associated with Communism, as such has been banned in some former Soviet states.

Overall, it just feels like a movie out of place in time. Fifteen years prior, Frank Zagarino could have been the next Dolph Lundgren, but instead he was relegated to the depths (of Netflix)

What Went Right? Zagarino has a lot of charisma, but I'm frankly not sure why. he's not a great actor, and his role was certainly not well written. He and Joe Lara as Ponytail both seem to be having a ton of fun in their roles though. One as a stereotype of action heroes, the other as an over the top super villain. Sure they both chew every piece of scenery they can find, but that actually works to the movie's credit. It never takes itself at all seriously, because serious action movies are the worst. If you want proof of how fun/cheesey this movie is, just listen to the music or take a look at that awesome poster.

Verdict: Pretty much McBain from the Simpsons, and that's pretty cool.
Score: 75%

Nude For Satan (1974)

Background: The '60s and '70s were bumper times for Italian cinema. The spaghetti westerns and horror movies are now considered to be some of the best ever made. Sergio Leone and Dario Argento were heralded even in our neck of the woods, hard to believe in these modern times that a foreign film could achieve mainstream success. Today's foray into the depths was not made by either of those two legends, but rather Luigi Batzella. Batzella is described on Wikipedia as "an Italian Z-movie director," and a "hack-of-all-trades," and perhaps most damningly "the Italian Ed Wood." His article goes on to call Nude For Satan "arguably [his] best film," so it can't be all bad, right?

It should be noted that this movie is distributed by a company called Redemption U.S.A. A company with a singular vision to release all the erotic movies it can find, usually with a vampiric or satanic vibe, like Nude For Satan. The title card they put at the beginning of this movie is a full minute long, featuring a blood drenched set of breasts being attacked by a vampire queen of some sort, all filmed on what looks to be a decades old VHS tape that had been lost for quite some time in a damp basement.

It's surprising though that a movie such as this would get lost on Netflix. Two of the most popular categories on Netflix are Horror and anything that sounds like it might have boobs in it. I can't tell you how many times I've been recommended I Am A Sex Addict or Strictly Sexual

Plot: After the long title card comes a scene of a naked woman running through the forest which may or may not be part of the movie itself, it's really hard to tell. After the credits, a man in a white Beetle speeds off into the lightning filled (though curiously rainless) night. This man is Dr. William Benson. He swerves off the road after seeing a woman standing in his path. After checking out the scene hears another crash. After checking out the scene of the crash and finding an unconscious woman, Susan Smith, he goes to find help. A mysterious man with a gothic Liberace vibe points him to a mysterious castle, shot exclusively in day-for-night goodness.

In the castle, William finds a woman who looks exactly like Susan, except dressed in Victorian garb and far more awake than he left her. Curiously, this woman insists on calling him Peter, which confuses William, but he blames it on shock. Susan also makes her way into the castle after she wakes up, where she runs into a fake William who calls her Evelyn.

From here the plot gets almost impossible to explain because frankly there isn't a whole lot of it. What little forward momentum there is moves at such a glacial pace that it's hard to tell when things actually happen. Gothic Liberace lurks around to offer stiff, hamfisted monologues about time and souls, Susan has lesbian fantasies about a servant girl (none of this makes any sense thematically or as part of the plot), Evelyn seduces William, Susan gets attacked by the worst looking fake spider ever, etc, etc..

We eventually learn that Peter and Evelyn are the evil versions of William and Susan. The scene where Peter reveals this fact to William is pretty much the only scene in the entire movie that has any clue how a movie should be paced. The evil persona incarnate is certainly not an uncommon twist, but most movies usually have the courtesy to set up the fact that the characters might have an evil side, unlike this movie, which just kinda chucks it at you.

Spoiler: Gothic Liberace is the devil. Probably.

Why Was It Forgotten? To be frank: this is not a good movie. I get that movies moved a lot slower in the '70s, especially horror movies. There was a time when movies could be actually scary and not just a two hour assault of gross imagery and jump scares, but this is not that kind of movie. There is barely a half hour sitcom worth of plot in this 90 minute movie. The rare story beats are cut through with slow motion eroticism that lasts way too long. It seems to actually make looking at boobs into a chore.

And then there's the dialogue. Never mind the fact that it sounds like it was spoken by the original Italian actors reading phonetic pronunciations of their translated dialogue, the words that are being said are terrible. It's impossible to follow any one conversation, all the talk from the devil about being lost in time being particularly egregious.

What Went Right? Well. There's one music cue that I really like. It's just a progression of minor chords, but it works. The rest of the music is trash, but at least there's that one cue that's cool. There are times that the movie actually succeeds at creating a spooky mood too. Those moments are fleeting, however.

Verdict: A moody, nonsensical mess of ineptitude.
Score: 8%