Highwaymen (2004)

Tags

Action, Colm Feore, Drama, Frankie Faison, Highwaymen, Jim Caviezel, Movie, Rhona Mitra

ma'am, would you like us to escort you out of this movie?

R

Jim Caviezel, Rhona Mitra, Frankie Faison, Colm Feore

Rennie: We have a lot in common, you and me.
Molly: People in our lives get run over.
Rennie: Perfect fit.

A sadistic killer is stalking the highways in his Cadillac Eldorado, running people down ruthlessly.  James “Rennie” Cray (Caviezel) is the only one trying to stop him and the only one who can save Molly (Mitra), a woman who is being stalked by the highway killer after surviving an earlier attack.

Glad this one was free on-demand…

Though, I will say, it was good for a laugh or two.  Despite the ridiculousness of the quote above, this is not a comedy.  In fact, everything, including that exchange, is played with the utmost seriousness.  Which makes it even funnier.  Want some more bad dialogue?  How about this confusing exchange:

Molly: Did you mean to hit him?
Rennie: I didn’t know much about driving back then.  You know it’s basic obstacle avoidance.  You’re not supposed to look at the thing you’re trying to avoid, or you’ll drive right into it.  All I know is, I was lookin’ at him.

That’s Rennie talking about ramming the killer’s car with his own car after witnessing the guy run over his wife.  Now, first of all, he had to already be in his 30s when that happened, so why he said he didn’t know much about driving, I don’t know.  Plus, going by the flashback to the incident we see, I’m pretty sure he meant to crash into the guy!

After that ugly incident, the killer was brought back from near death, but had to have several limbs replaced, which left him looking like some sort of early model Terminator.  Except, much less scary.  I think the movie would have been better served to never even show the guy in the car, sort of like Spielberg’s early movie, Duel.

This is a stupid movie.  There’s nothing original about it, the dialogue is terrible (though, amusingly so), and the performances from Caviezel and Mitra are so bland that I would have trouble even paying them if I was the makers of this movie.  The only one who brings anything interesting to his performance is Faison, as a traffic accident investigator.  He at least tries to inject some energy into this otherwise stale production.  The car chases are dull, except for maybe the one where the killer drags another car behind his on its roof, but it’s not staged very well, so it still doesn’t really work.  Plus, where are all the other people in the world??  Every chase seems to happen on a road with absolutely no other cars, even in the middle of town.

If you want a few laughs and need a movie to give the MST3K treatment to, by all means, check this one out.  If you’re looking for a quality action/thriller, skip it.

Look both ways…

10 – 3.5 for bad acting and bad dialogue – 2 for being totally unoriginal and bland – .6 for some poorly staged action sequences + .1 for the unintentional laughs = 4.0

Adam (2009)

Tags

Adam, Amy Irving, Comedy, Drama, Frankie Faison, Hugh Dancy, Movie, Peter Gallagher, Romance, Rose Byrne

they said you were spacey, but this is ridiculous...

PG-13

Hugh Dancy, Rose Byrne, Peter Gallagher, Amy Irving, Frankie Faison

Beth: Some nerve, right?  Calling a school in the middle of Manhattan “Wildwood”??

Adam (Dancy) is an Asperger’s Syndrome sufferer living on his own for the first time after his father passes away.  When Beth (Byrne) moves in upstairs and befriends Adam, he’s forced to break out of his sheltered life if he wants to continue seeing this new woman he’s taken a liking to.

Occasionally a movie comes along that is otherwise average but gets elevated quite a bit by a performer that I find so charming that the whole feel of the movie is enhanced by their presence.  This is one of those movies, and Rose Byrne is one of those performers.  I adore her and could probably watch her in anything.  I’m not sure it’s even her performance exactly that’s so great, it’s just her.

With that out of the way, let’s get to the movie.  It’s not bad.  It all seems a little familiar, but Dancy and Byrne are good together, and there’s a certain simple, believable sweetness to their relationship.  Some of the dramatic turns seem contrived, but it never really goes overboard.  Plus, the ending isn’t all sappy and formulaic, which is good.

I can’t help but feel that the movie walks a bit of a tightrope with how it portrays Adam, though.  For the most part it seems like an attempt at a realistic portrayal of somebody dealing with this disorder, but occasionally in creeps that sort of innocent wisdom that enlightens all those around him aspect of movies featuring characters like this.  Almost like Adam is an E.T. type character that shows up, enriches their lives in some ways while showing them new truths, then moves on.  Thankfully that’s only present in small doses here and there, but the opening narration from Beth about Adam being like the The Little Prince had me worried.

All in all, I don’t think this movie is going to change anybody’s life, but it’s pleasant, amusing, and hopeful without being corny.  Plus…ya know…Rose Byrne’s in it…

As long as you’re attractive, women can overlook your crippling social awkwardness.

10 – 1.5 for some subplots that weren’t all that compelling – 1.1 for the story not being particularly original + .2 for Rose = 7.6