Duel (1971) Macabre month of horror #4

Duel (1971) Macabre month

Here’s one you might not have heard of. Duel is a car chase movie, but instead of a chase it is quite literally a car “Duel”.

The main character David Mann is played by Dennis Weaver. He is driving a little car and being attacked by an unknown person in an 18 wheeler.

A tagline for the film is “The most bizarre murder weapon ever used!” This makes me think of the Tarantino film Death Proof‘. I wonder if this movie might have been his inspiration.

Perhaps the strongest point of the movie, is the tension and intrigue.

We don’t know exactly why he is being attacked, or who is even doing it. The tension keeps building and building. The tension winds up and is released in a great ending which was ripped off in “Joy Ride“.

The film is directed by Steven Spielberg and was actually made as a TV movie. Spielberg had directed many shorts and some TV episodes, but this was his first feature length endeavor.

The main character is actually very interesting. He is a deeper character than was needed, and this is certainly appreciated. There is a whole sub plot regarding the main character and his wife who is back at the home with his children.

This sub plot is unnecessary, but adds an extra level to the character. Dennis Weaver does great, really a very good performance. The character is very interesting and has a great narration throughout the film.

Of course the movie contains a great deal of driving, and this is before everything was done with CG. I always prefer real cars, and real stunts over CG.  All the car work is very well done. A classic 70’s car movie like “Gone in 60 seconds“, or “Dirty Larry Crazy Mary”.

This if more of a thriller than an action movie. As a thriller it is great. I really suggest checking it out if you are able to find it.

 

Freddy VS Jason (2003) Macabre Month of Horror #2

Freddy VS Jason

Freddy VS Jason ‘ is a great idea. Having two of the greatest horror villains of all time, fighting it out in a movie together.

This was not the first time horror icons have mixed. Characters such as Frankenstein, Dracula, and the Wolfman have all been in movies together.

Freddy vs. Jason led to many possibilities for the future. There was talk about a Freddy vs. Jason vs. Leather Face.

There were many short films continuing the fight including a 2011 short film adding Ash from “Evil Dead” into the fray.

The possibility of ‘Freddy vs. Jason’ first came from the ending of Jason goes to Hell’. At the end of the movie Jason’s mask is grabbed by the clawed glove of Freddy Krueger.  That movie came out in 1993, it took 10 years to actually get ‘Freddy vs. Jason‘ made.

Fans of the two characters either love or hate this movie. I personally love it, but I can understand why people may not. The movie is not serious at all. If you look at it as a serious film, it won’t be good. The film is very over the top and has fun with what it’s doing. I think the best horror films are the kind that have fun with it.

The battle between Freddy and Jason is exactly what I was looking for. They have a strong conflict throughout leading to a final battle that I think is perfect for what they were going for. It is very satisfying to see these two iconic characters fight it out.

There are some liberties taken with the characters. The mythology may be changed slightly, but not to the point where it is disgraceful to the franchises.

I think this is best of both franchises. It is just so much fun. But, in terms of horror, the first “Nightmare on Elm Street” wins.

 

Four Rooms Review of Rodriguez and Tarantino Sections

Four Rooms Review of Rodriguez and Tarantino Sections

“Four Rooms” is an anthology of four stories each one by a different writer/director, but all starring the same main character.

Tim Roth stars as Ted the Bellhop, the character that connects the stories together. Each story takes place in a different room of the hotel that Ted works at. The time is New Year’s Eve and everybody is celebrating. Ted is practically alone at the hotel, and has to rush around to the rooms. The movie is mainly a comedy.

Robert Rodriguez does the third  section of the movie. His section is called The Misbehaviors. Antonio Banderas is in the part and he plays some kind of gangster or tough guy, it’s not very clear. He and his girlfriend, or wife (not very clear again) are bored and want to do something exciting, so Banderas takes charge. He makes Ted take care of the kids while him and the woman go out and see the fireworks, and do “other stuff”.

There are two kids, a little girl and a little boy. The boy looks like Banderas and the girl looks like the woman. This leads me to believe that the two adults both are single parents meeting up, because the kids look so different. There are little funny bits sprinkled throughout, but nothing really that funny…until the end. When you get to the end you see how the rest of the segment is all leading up to the hilarious climax. Everything just erupts at once, at the moment that Antonia Banderas walks back in.

Spoiler Alert: At the end the room is on fire, there is vomit everywhere, the paintings are ruined, there is dead hooker in the bed, and there is a giant syringe plummeting towards his child and the kid is smoking a cigarette, and more chaos. Everything comes full circle, and all the little things that seemed random before now make perfect sense. Throughout the segment they are always complaining about the smell, and think that it is someone;s feet. Turns out they were smelling a dead body rotting in the bed the whole time. Everything works out with perfect comedic timing.

The acting is good, but nothing special from the parents, and the kids, are really awkward, but I think they’re supposed to be that way. Selma Hayek is in the movie. She just plays a stripper who dances on the TV, and you never see her head.

This segment works, because of the fantastic ending.

Quentin Tarantino’s  section is called “The Man From Hollywood. Tarantino is the man and stars in this section. Bruce Willis also stars in this part, working with Tarantino again after Pulp Fiction”.

Tarantino has the ending segment, and the credits play while his part ends. This segment fits perfectly at the end. I think that this segment is the best. Best, does not mean funniest. This segment is the best speaking in terms of acting, and writing. Personally I think it is funnier throughout than any other segment, but the ending of the Rodriguez segment is arguably the funniest part of the movie.

This section can be summarized as: Ted the Bellhop goes into the penthouse suite, and is talked into refereeing a bet between Tarantino’s character and Paul Calderon’s (also from Pulp Fiction) character.

Bruce Willis‘ character spends the majority of the segment fighting with his wife over the phone. A character from the second segment , played by Jennifer Beals comes back for Tarantino’s segment, she doesn’t do too much though. Tarantino plays a big shot, Hollywood movie director who is staying at the hotel, spending New Year’s Eve partying with his friends.

The bet is over a Zippo lighter and is inspired by a 1960 Alfred Hitchcock Presents episode, “Man From the South” starring Peter Lorre and Steve McQueen.

Paul Calderon‘s character has to light his lighter 10 times in a row. If he wins he gets Tarantino’s brand new expensive car, but if he loses, his pinky finger gets cut off.

Most of the segment is Tarantino trying to convince Ted to cut off his finger if he losses the bet. Ted finally accepts. When the time comes, the comedic timing is so perfectly hilarious.

 “Four Rooms” is a good movie. But it’s a great one if you skip the first half.  

 

Haunted by the Theremin from Midsomer Murders

I love watching Midsomer Murders, but I really need to stop watching it right before bed. I find even after I turn off the show the theremin music haunts me, playing in my head, following me from room to room. It’s not the blood, gore or the horrifying ways they find to kill off people. It’s that hypnotizing, haunting melody that really freaks me out.

Don’t know what a theremin is? It’s the only instrument you can play without actually touching in.

I came across Midsomer Murders one day while looking for a new series to check out on Netflix. It was love at first site.  Each episode is around an hour and half, sometimes more. So, each one is more like a movie than a tv show.

Midsomer Murders is a British detective show based on the books by Caroline Graham featuring Detective Barnaby.

These stories were originally adapted by Anthony Horowitz, the author of the extremely popular Alex Rider series. I love this article he wrote for The Daily Mail where he talks about his involvement with Midsomer Murders ~ “According to Bentley Productions, which makes the series, these number 200 murders, 11 accidental deaths, ten suicides and six natural deaths. And I must plead guilty to at least a dozen of them.” He also happens to be one of Sam’s favorite authors making it a double bonus to watch the episodes he wrote the screenplays for.

Midsommer Murders
Until 2011 the lead character DCI Tom Barnaby  was played by John Nettles. Anthony Horowitz actually penned Nettles last episode.

Each story revolves around Barnaby’s efforts to solve the far too many murders that take place in the fictional English county of Midsomer. He is always aided in his efforts by a Sergeant. My favorite was DS Gavin Troy played by Daniel Casey. I had really hoped he would hook up with Cully and stay on the show but he got a promotion and moved on. He and Cully only shared one kiss, that we saw anyway. (wink, wink). I also really like DS Ben Jones played by Jason Hughes. He is seriously cute and still on the show.

I loved seeing the relationship between Barnaby and his wife Joyce played by Jane Wymark and their daughter Cully played by Laura Howard. The show isn’t just about solving murders but the relationship between family members and how Barnaby is when he’s off the clock.

The show has some laugh out load moments, it can be touching and tender, sometimes completely shocking and there is some nudity as well.

When Nettles’s character Tom Barnaby left the show his younger cousin John Barnaby, played by Neil Dudgeon, came to replace him.

The stories are fantastic, the acting superb and the settings gorgeous. But, my favorite part of watching this series is spotting actors from other movies and shows that I love appearing in episodes. It’s like seeing an old friend and not being able to wipe the smile from your face.

    • Jessica Hynes, at the 2008 Comic-Con Spaced panel.
      Jessica Hynes, at the 2008 Comic-Con Spaced panel. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

      Jessica Hynes who I loved inSpaced  and “Shaun of the Dead”  was in the very first episode.

    •  Orlando Bloom of “Pirates of the Caribbean” and “Lord of the Ring” fame appeared in Season 3 Episode 3 “Judgement Day”. He does get murdered, but you can check out his oh so adorable naked butt before he does.
    • Several actors from my favorite movie “Hot Fuzz  appeared in the series including; David Bradley who played the farmer with all the guns in his barn. (He was also Filch in Harry Potter.) Paul Freeman played the reverend, Olivia Coleman played PC Doris “What makes you think it was muuurrr-ddeeerrr” Thatcher, Anne Reid who played Leslie Tiller the flower shop owner, Kenneth Cranham who played the farmer Mr. Reaper, Ron Cook whose mansion didn’t fit in with the town’s rustic esthetic,and Lucy Punch who played Eve Draper with the annoying laugh. There may have been more but those were the ones I remember noticing.

 

From Dusk Till Dawn (1996) Part 2

From Dusk Till Dawn (1996)

Cheech Marin is in the movie, so is Cheech Marin, and Cheech Marin is in the movie too. Cheech Marin plays 3 roles in the movie.

Cheech Marin first appears as a border patrol cop, then as the bar greeter, and then he shows up again as Carlos, the guy that they were meeting in Mexico. Cheech Marin is in other Robert Rodriguez movies, such as “Desperado”, “Once Upon a Time in Mexico”, and “Machete“.

On a side note about Cheech’s role’s in the Mexico trilogy: sometimes people think that Cheech is playing the same character in both movies. I believe he is not though.

Cheech play’s a bartender in both movies but they are different characters. The evidence is that they are different bars which doesn’t really prove anything. But, in the credits of “Desperado” he is listed as “short bartender” and in Once Upon a Time in Mexico he is listed as “Belini”. The most compelling evidence is that Cheech was killed in “Desperado”, but in “Once Upon a Time in Mexico” his character has an eye-patch. In “Machete” a character gets shot in the eye and then comes back with an eye-patch. But Cheech from “Desperado” wasn’t shot in the eye, he was shot in the middle of the head. So it is not the same character. That tangent should probably belong in a “Desperado” review but, whatever.

Tom Savini does the Special Gore effects. He is the same guy that has done the effects for the George Romero movies such as “Dawn of the Dead.” He also does the makeup even for himself. All of the special effects look great, and this is the kind of movie where bad special effects could really hurt the second half of the movie.

Tom Savini also plays a role in the movie, the character of Sex Machine. This character is awesome he uses a whip and a dick gun. The same cod-piece weapon is seen in the guitar case in “Desperado” although it is never used. Tom Savini ends up changing into a vampire, which is disappointing that you can’t see him kill anymore vampires, but as a vampire he does the most damage. He also transforms into a weird baby bat, which looks like a rat.

Quentin Tarantino after being bitten

Fred “The Hammer” Williams is in “From Dusk Till Dawn”. Fred was in a lot of grindhouse movies, which is why they picked him for the role. Danny Trejo play’s the bartender, and is good as he always is, he is in almost all Rodriguez movies.

 After the first wave of attacks there is a group of survivors that make an awesome team, the team is eventually killed off until there are only 2 of them left. There is a great part in the break that is a clear tribute to classic horror movies, where the group  are discussing how to kill vampires.

Now the vampires do not look like traditional vampires, not even close. They look more like demons, lizards, and rats. Sometimes they actually look like bats, but they don’t look like the classic Bela Lugosi, with slicked hair and a black cape. I have heard people defend “Twilight” saying that it is a new take on vampires, and that people don’t like it because they don’t like change. That is not true. If you want to see vampires done differently than the classic archetype, then watch from “Dusk Till Dawn”.

“Twilight” is not a new take on vampires, it is a disgrace to vampires. I hate when people, especially younger people, think that the vampires in “Twilight” are how vampires should be, or supposed to be.

There is a particular vampire in the movie that has a mouth for a stomach, and uses it to eat people’s head’s. You probably didn’t see it because it was removed from the movie for going too far. It is rumored that Quentin Tarantino puked when he saw the effect happen. The scene where it ate the head was removed but the creature itself stayed. You can see the vampire with the mouth stomach walking around still, just without the gory payoff.

part 3 coming soon

“Indochine” Movie Review ~ By Sam

Cover of "Indochine"
Cover of Indochine

Starring

Catherine Deneuve as Eliane

Vincent Perez as Jean-Baptiste

Dan Pham as Camille

Indochine” is a French made movie made in 1992 and brought to America the same year. “Indochine” stars Catherine Deneuve and Vincent Perez.

The movie takes place 1930 in Indochina which is no called Vietnam. The movie is about an Indochinese girl who is adopted by the French plantation owner, the girl falls in love with a member of the French navy which is taboo. The movie focuses on the forbidden love as well as the occupation of Indochina by the French.

The acting is all very good, from the stars to the side characters. The characters each have their own personalities and are vastly different despite having common goals and/or common threats.

English: Catherine Deneuve Français : Catherin...

Catherine Deneuve’s character gives a narration which, although isn’t used very often, seems out of place. She narrates events where the character is not present, but this is

compensated for by making the narrative a reflection of the events.

The music for the movie is great, in terms of suspense and action. The movie has it’s own theme music that plays during important moments in the film. The movie has elements of action, romance, historical fiction, and drama, but at its heart it is a heavy romantic drama, the other elements are to compliment the story.

The occupation of Indochina is taken from actually events however the rest is very loosely based around the true premise.  When the French occupied they brought language, religion, architecture and food. Today Architecture still resembles French architecture and some French food remains but language and religion brought by France is dwindling. The French brought Christianity and while some older Vietnamese people still use Christianity most people do not.

Indochine is quite a long movie about two and a half hours long but worth watching if you feel like a very heavy drama based around romance and a historical basis.

(spoken language is French with english subtitles available)

Falling Down Movie Review Part 2 ~ by Sam

“Heavy Spoilers”

As previously mentioned he takes a baseball bat from a man whose shop he destroys. This is the very beginning of the film, the first thing he does after ditching his car is going to use a pay-phone, which he uses to call his (ex) wife but doesn’t actually say anything, nerves get to him and a story arch is later completed with him and his former family, that he is trying to maintain a role in, however unwanted his role is.

After hanging up he wants to call again immediately but doesn’t have the change, that is why he goes into the shop. The guy will not give him change unless he buy’s something, so he does, or tries to anyway. Now in the year 2012 the price needs to be adjusted for inflation but the point still gets across. The point is that the soda he wants to buy is over-priced along with everything in the shop. The shop owner is Korean, and the conversation is the start of why people believe that D-fens is racist. I don’t think that is really racist but just extremely patriotic. He doesn’t have a problem with the guy because he is Asian but instead because he feels the man coming to his country and not even bothering to learn English is what he find’s offensive.

After destroying the shop the man say’s “just take it, take whatever you want” D-fens is extremely offended by this. “I’m not a thief, is that what you think I am” he say’s before paying for his soda and leaving. He has morals and stealing is against his morals. He is actually a man who really values morals. Stealing is bad in his book but destroying a man’s shop is okay because he feels it is deserved for how he is treated, and as the movie progresses he starts using violence more and more to solve his problems because he see’s how easy it really is, and it pisses him off that he has worked so hard his whole life and not accomplished or been recognized for his achievements when he could have just been doing things the easy way all along and maybe ended up better off.

Things that push him to violence become smaller and more insignificant as he becomes more complacent with his violent actions. I think the writer really used little things that piss him off to use as things that push D-fens to violence. Most things that push D-fens are things that deal with everyday but he just wont take it anymore. He’s done putting up with it and now he’s making them pay for it.

Little issues people have with everyday life such as gang occupation, plastic surgeons being more wealthy than people more deserving, unnecessary construction projects just to meet the budget, he even pulls a gun out in a Whammy Burger because they won’t serve him breakfast. The situation escalates when false advertising makes its way into the standoff. He even ends up deciding that he doesn’t really even want breakfast after holding a gun to the manager because of breakfast in the first place, again showing how it isn’t really the act that angers him it’s the methods behind it.

False advertising is because of the burger he gets is flat and compares it to the picture while trying to have a somewhat casual conversation he has put in danger in the restaurant, even talking to a little kid asking him questions. In the same scene is another important character development moment. He is supposed to be an average guy pushed too far, and an average guy isn’t an action hero or an expert with guns. In the restaurant he accidentally fires the gun into the ceiling which really adds realism and reminds you of the “average guy” element. A similar moment happens later with the rocket launcher. He has a kid show him how to use it (and he still does it wrong).

From the beginning he doesn’t look for trouble, trouble finds him, in the beginning he tries to avoid conflict while being completely willing to follow through at the same time. But he has an extreme temper and when his anger builds up enough, that’s when he goes berserk.

Realism is really important in this movie and without a powerful sense of realism the movie wouldn’t be half as good. Good thing the realism factor is handled extremely well. The movie has many far away helicopter shots where the character of D-fens blends right into the crowds. There are so many pedestrians and random civilians all over the place it really makes the situations more intense and realistic. All the colors are very vivid and bright which is in sharp contrast to the dark tone of the movie. Pedestrians get caught in the way of all the violence; people on the street get shot in drive by’s, D-fens terrorizes a golf course and almost uses a family as hostages without realizing it. When he does eventually realize it he is mad at himself because he hurt the little girl by accident.

Speaking of little girls, his own little girl is what gives him direction moving him on his self-destructive journey. Throughout the movie he is trying to get to his daughter’s birthday party, and people just keep getting in his way. A darker reality surfaces with his family making a little bit less of an average guy but a little more twisted than previously led to believe.

The movie ends with a confrontation between the characters played by Robert Duval  and Michael Douglas. Michael Douglas delivers his line “I’m the bad guy?” he finally comes to terms with the fact that he is doing bad things, the entire time he thought what he was doing was justified and the right thing. Upon this realization he makes the cop kill him by pulling a fake gun and getting shot. The ending is great, he gets shot, breaks the railing and bounces back up to his feet to deliver one last line before falling over the railing to his assumed death (he fell into the water and there is a slight chance he could have survived the gunshot wound) but he is most likely dead, which is the most appropriate ending possible.

The story arch of D-fens is similar to the story arch of Tony Montana from the movie “Scarface” Both characters have a rise and fall both ending in their deaths. Both become corrupted in a sense and to a different extent hate themselves for what they have become. Neither start off as particularly good people but they grow significantly worse throughout the film.

Falling Down is a Fantastic movie that deserves more recognition than it has. The following of the movie is small enough to have the movie be known as a cult classic. The movie is extremely underrated. The movie is very deep but even without analyzing it and seeing the deeper meanings, I think the movie would still be enjoyable but to a lesser extent. I think the main message is that life isn’t fair but you have to deal with it, lose your cool and your world will come crashing down around you.

Falling Down (1993) Movie Review Part 1 ~ By Sam

*HEAVY SPOILERS*

“Falling Down” is proof that not all Joel Schumacher films suck, mainly just his Batman movies.

Falling down is a great movie that I believe should be known as a classic, among the ranks of the Scarface, “Die Hard”, and other timeless must see movies. (That is the quick review should you read no more.)

“Falling Down” is a self proclaimed “tale of urban reality”, which has a meaning that becomes more clear as you watch the movie.

The movie feels like an epic of the life of William Foster, his decline from normality into the destructive being he is by the end of the film. William Foster, played by Michael Douglas, is listed in the credits as “D-fens” which is also the name on the vanity plate of his car, the name has a meaning which is later revealed in the movie. Almost all of the background information of the character is revealed in one point close to the end. This is good because it leaves the character mysterious and much more interesting than it would if they revealed the information earlier on.

The Character of William Foster is what really pushes the movie towards greatness, and the portrayal of the character of William Foster by Michael Douglas solidifies the character as one of the greatest movie characters and is one I would like to know more about. He will be on my upcoming top ten list “top ten most interesting characters.”

The movie starts when D-fens is pretty much at his breaking point already but is still retaining shreds of dignity and self respect, as well as shards of his sanity.

The film starts with D-fens in his car stuck in grid-lock traffic, he freaks out and ends up running from his car off through a small forest and onto main roads in a very bad part of town, leaving his car in the way of the traffic, which also introduces the largest sub-character detective Prendergast played by Robert Duval. D-fens has a small suitcase with him as he walks through the streets and the case plays two key roles in establishing his character:

#1. Men try to take his briefcase and he wont have it. He stands up for himself and ends up beating them back and leaves with his briefcase and one of their knives which I will mention again shortly. He almost gets killed trying to keep his briefcase and he is well aware of what will happen to him if he doesn’t give it to them. This makes you very interested to know what is inside the case.

#2 The briefcase helps developing his character. He later gives away his briefcase to a bum saying “I don’t need it anymore” when the bum opens the case it only contains a sandwich and an apple. Now I believe this means two things. The first is to show how the case itself wasn’t what he was trying to preserve, it was the idea behind it. It wouldn’t matter whether the case was empty or whether it contained a million dollars, he would defend it the same, for the principles behind it.

The second thing that this establishes comes from the line he said “I don’t need it anymore.” I think the briefcase in a way represents what is left of his humanity or perhaps normality. This is after he has the gun bag and in a way him keeping the gun bag and leaving the suitcase he started with shows how he passed the point of no return and that he has traded his old lifestyle choices for his new found attitude. Soon after he ditches the suitcase he also changes his clothes into an old army jumpsuit and his glasses get broken. By this point he has completely changed throughout the movie, he doesn’t even look the same as he did in the beginning, the rest of the movie before this he looks extremely out of place in geeky glasses and a white shirt and tie and now he has transformed into what he finds is actually more rewarding.

D-fens has a very interesting progression, even down to the terms of his weapon progression. He begins with no weapon then takes a baseball bat from a man whose shop he destroys. Next he takes a butterfly knife from some gang members, then a large gym bag full of guns, and later he even finds a rocket launcher. The progression was very interesting and complimented his personal progression into the being he is by the end of the film.

End of Part 1

“The Killing Jar” Movie Review by Sam

Director: Mark Young

Stars

Michael Madsen as Doe

Amber Benson as Noreen

Harold Perrineau as Smith

The Killing Jar” has both Danny Trejo and Michael Madsen, two cool guys, in a horrible movie.

Danny Trejo

Before I say anything else,  let me talk about Danny Trejo’s role in this movie. First thing I thought when I saw him was; man he looks like he really doesn’t want to be there. I think he lost a bet and was forced to be in the movie. I later found out that he wasn’t there during shooting. Trejo’s scenes were filmed separately
and then edited into the film after, that must be the reason why he is in the kitchen behind the counter the whole movie. That really shows how bad the director was. Danny Trejo couldn’t give a good performance because the director completely sucks!

Anyways time for the plot. A semi-psychotic man kills a bunch of people in a diner that is the entire movie. I just saved you an hour and a half. The story is uninspired and a waste of time at best.

The title has almost no relation to the movie. When you hear “The
Killing Jar” what do you think of? Definitely not a slaughter in a
diner. During the main title sequence which also has no relation to
the story by the way, the title sequence shows grainy footage of jars. I guess maybe that’s where the title comes from but that doesn’t make any sense. I suppose the diner could be the “Jar” but that’s a stretch. In the jars are butterflies, which again, have no relation to the movie

The acting is bad, very bad, but I do not blame the actors, again I
blame the director. In the beginning of the movie it seems like one of those found footage movies, but that idea quickly disperses and the audience is left with no pay off or any real reason for including it in the first place. The rest of the movie is filmed regularly.

The movie does a lot of pointless things, such as the killer repeatedly putting a bag on a guys head then taking it off and putting it back on again, there is absolutely no point he already saw his face, and he kills him anyway so it’s pointless.

Amber Benson

The writing is as bad if not worse than the directing. Forget about the bland, uninspired story and the horrible (multiple) endings and just focus on the characters. The characters are horribly written and completely stupid. This is terrible because the movie rides on the characters.

The characters say and do things that nobody would ever say or do. For example; a guy walks into the diner and asks where the bathroom is, the waitress points to the bathroom, the guy repeats “Is there a bathroom?” (i guess he doesn’t believe her pointing) the waitress say’s “yeah it’s over there” and she points again. The guy goes “Over here?”and he points again, the waitress points again, the guy points like he’s asking then walks away.The movie is filled with these moments, the characters do things that
people would never say or think to do.

Michael Madsen

Michael Madsen is revealed as a killer immediately when the movie starts, then the movie tries to act like it’s a mystery who the killer is. The opening shows the climax of the movie and then cuts back in time. The scene where the killing actually happens is the best part of the movie, which isn’t saying much. There is no real motive for the killing either. Any possible reason is denied by the killer. You may think he’s insane but no they prove that wrong. You may think that he is just a sick twisted guy but they deny that as well. The killer actually say’s that it was just a moment of weakness, which takes away any threat brought on by the killer. It also doesn’t make sense either. He doesn’t just flip and kill them, he leaves and goes outside
then he comes back in with a shotgun and kills them.

This movie was horrible filled with stupid pot twists and characters
that are completely unbelievable and dumb. Just ignore the movie you probably never heard of it anyway. The writing and directing are both God awful and the movie is a complete failure!

Maximum Overdrive Movie Review ~ By Sam

Maximum Overdrive is based off the Stephen King short story Trucks. I wonder why this is the movie he was most involved with out of all the others. Stephen King cameo is as a guy who gets insulted by an ATM. This is the only movie which Stephen King actually directed. This also happens to be my favorite movie based on a Stephen King book.

“Maximum Overdrive” is about trucks that  come to life and start killing people. But its not just trucks, it’s everything electrical. It might sound stupid, but that’s because it is stupid, and it knows its stupid. The movie goes really over the top and has fun in doing so, and I enjoy that. There are other movies like that such as the two “Crank” movies. I really like that style.


AC/DC exclusively does the music for this movie. Their album Who Made Who is the “Maximum Overdrive” sound track. In the opening a bridge opens on its own causing cars on the bridge to be destroyed. On the bridge is the AC/DC van.

Emilio Estevez stars in this movie. His character is very
forgettable, but the people aren’t really why you watch the movie. Other memorable supporting cast members are, are an extremely annoying waitress who does nothing but scream, and a very weird couple who just got married.

Most of the movie takes place at a rest stop gas station, but
there are others areas as well, like the baseball field, which has my two favorite parts.

First is when a soda machine starts killing a baseball team with cans, and the second is when a steamroller rides onto the field. A kid gets run over by the steamroller, it is rumored that there was some kind of head explosion effect, but it had to be removed, because of censorship issues.

There is a reason for all the electrical things coming to life, but it doesn’t make any sense. Mostly because there are two completely different explanations, and both of them are stupid. One explanation involves a meteorite passing over the earth, and the other has almost no relation to it. Each reason is not really explained; they just show up in text, one in the beginning and one at the end.

The truck stop is named “The Dixie Boy Truck Stop”. The truck stop was real and remained open for a while after the movie. Someone bought it and eventually got rid of the truck stop.

Definitely not a movie everyone will like, but I enjoyed it for what it is: stupid and fun as hell, with trucks, guns, and AC/DC.