iaido

A pre-Nerd Robert Carradine, a pre-Automan Desi Arnaz Jr., and an almost pre-pubescent Melanie Griffith take to the road and head for Alaska with romantic dreams of becoming wealthy salmon fishers. Well, their dream is about as exciting as this lackluster youth road movie. They aren't particularly interesting, and the film doesn't exactly have much of a point, beyond `We got together the spawn of some famous people and made a low budget film about their misadventures.' Out of the cannon of 60's and 70's road films and rebel youth films, this one is mediocre, under developed, uninvolving characters, not much wit, not much freshness to the story, which is as bland as the films muddy landscape.

But, for those who care- They head to Alaska, and apparently Alaska was like the Wild West in the 70's because everyone carries a gun and is rough and tumble. Robert Carradine says charming things like `I hope we can find a shower, my nuts sure itch.' (And he's the one with Melanie Griffith!) They are quickly robbed and forced to take jobs, and the local bigwig, their employer, puts the moves on Melanie and eventually fires Desi for not being corrupt. That's when they aren't smart and do not leave town, opting instead to eat dog food or go hungry, get beat up by the guys goons, and then take a joyride in the bigwigs car. The final half of the film abandons the evil bigwig as the trio commit a robbery, go on the run, and hatch a kidnapping scheme, and so forth. The film just sort of ends, annoyingly and ambiguously, but seeing as how they didn't bother to have much character development and story in the first place, its rather appropriate. Worth a look if you are really into low budget 70's fare, but ultimately pretty forgettable.

Very solid and straightforward entry into the Spaghetti Western genre. Lacks some of the off kilter atmosphere and inventive action of a stylish Sergio Leone or Sergio Corbucci picture, but, despite this, still manages to entertain with decent story, characters, a good villain, and dingy locations. Notably co-written by Italian film stalwarts Bruno Corbucci and Fernando Di Leo, and directed by the well-rounded Domenico Paollela.

Scruffy, good-natured, and free spirited Miguel just wants to go to New York and be an artist, and makes his money by dealing with a one-legged, underworld figure named Coyote. Cooper is an older family man, ashamed of being an outlaw, storing his loot so he can move his wife daughter away from the life he has fallen into, and he has the misfortune of having a cutthroat partner named Moxon. Cooper and Miguel cross paths when Cooper and Moxon rob the bank in which Miguel has been keeping his New York money. After slaughtering the bank tellers, Moxon tries to double cross Cooper during their escape, only to be thrown off the wagon and down the rocky mountainside. Miguel stops Cooper, only wanting his NY money, but unfortunately this polite exchange pins Miguel to Cooper as his accomplice, and the two are captured. Miguel is cleared and set free, promising Cooper that he will look in on his wife and daughter. Cooper on the other hand is sentenced to life with hard labor, stuck chest deep in a filthy marsh and interrogated as to the whereabouts of his loot. Moxon, bloodied and mean, gathers himself from the hillside and goes back to his gang of thugs.

It is after this setup that the film kicks into gear, with the surviving Moxon stealing back the loot and taking Cooper's daughter and wife, Cooper contracting a fatal case of malaria and escaping from jail, and Miguel having to eke out a living again (he doesn't get his NY money back) and deal with Moxon's gang, who is going after Coyote and his associates. So, in typical fashion, paths cross again, and the revenge fueled Cooper and feisty Miguel go after the cold-hearted Moxon and his gang, battling it out in the usual dilapidated locales of most Spaghetti Westerns. Its a ‘good' film, by a capable director, with defined characters, maybe a little sparse or bland in the action department, cinematography/settings were good, as well as the music (although could do without the bouncy , annoying `La Cucaracha' melody in one repeated theme). A nice film all around. Well worth a look. 7/10.

This is such an underrated movie. Romero's third ‘Dead' film has always lived in the shadow of the first two ‘Dead' films. While there are many parts of ‘Night of the Living Dead' and ‘Dawn of the Dead' that are superior, ‘Day' still holds its own and has some improvements over the first two. I'm not saying its better; its just not nearly as weak as horror fans have made it out to be.

The Acting- People have complained about the over the top acting in the film, but honestly, what ‘Dead' film has great acting? They all have pretty much community theater acting in them. Its not like the leads in ‘Dawn' were Hopkins, Pacino, and Streep. ‘Day' just has the same scenery chewing we've seen in the other ‘Dead' film (and most horror films for that matter). Atmosphere- the setting of the underground bunker is far more frightening than the house or mall in the other films, it is a great step forward in the series, very creepy. The makeup- Gone are the painted gray and green, K Mart bargain Halloween makeup of ‘Dawn'. The zombies are in ‘Day' far more unique and disgusting. Overall all the makeup fx are leaps and bounds better than the other films. The Plot is well structured giving a nice introduction and setting up the tense situation. Many have complained that the ending is abrupt, but its hard to say just what people think they are missing, those who survive, survive, and its pretty clear they are, any further action at that point would be exaggerating the escape. As far as Bub goes, he is the thing many zombie film lover hate, and that is a ‘thinking' zombie. There is that sect of horror fans who just want stupid, vacant, zombies incapable of speech or the ability to use tools, but Romero clearly has a purpose with ‘Day's zombies, taking the mythology further. And one can only imagine it helping in a fourth ‘Dead' film, a plague of thinking zombies, more formidable than the ones in previous films. You cant just repeat yourself, you have to cover new ground, and, regardless of what its detractors say, Romero did that task well in ‘Day of the Dead'.