crank Tagged Articles at Cinematical

Since the weekend has come and gone and the only ones still talking about Crank: High Voltage are the critics who were forced to go to midnight and opening day screenings to write their reviews, it should come as no surprise that the sequel to the popular 2006 film did not perform exceptionally well at the box office. Indeed, it landed at sixth place in the weekend's Top Ten, grossing just shy of $7 million, while the number one film, 17 Again, raked in almost $24 million. But that's just the way that non sequitur cinema works: no matter what you hope or expect to happen next, there's no predicting how things will turn out.

Sorry, you don't know what non sequitur cinema is? Well, it's the action subgenre launched in 2000 thanks to the directorial style of filmmaker McG's Charlie's Angels which has since morphed into its own, thrilling, nonsensical entity which sometimes makes careers, but more often, claims them.

Not to be confused with real movies, these "experiences" function on a level of sensory overload that transcends such paltry objectives as character development or storytelling. Rather, they're most easily recognized by a preponderance of visual style that annihilates coherent thought, leaves eye sockets singed, and considers adrenal glands only slightly more valuable than Faberge eggs made from baby seal pelts and wrapped in bald eagle feathers. The original Angels collected enough on screen talent not only to earn it $264 million in worldwide grosses, but a sequel that made nearly as much despite making no sense at all and actually making the first film seem much, much worse than it actually is. (Ask McG how he feels about the reception of the two films if you don't believe me.)

Some mild Crank: High Voltage spoilers to follow...

Taking in an estimated $6.5 million for the weekend, the Crank sequel seemed to please most fans (less so myself) and many critics (the Tomatometer now stands at 69%, over the original's 60%) without totally taking America by storm. Hey, we live in a world where not everyone wants to pay to see Jason Statham stick a lubed-up shotgun inside some thug's rectum -- different strokes, people, different strokes.

Now, as Chev Chelios finally confronted the man with the red cooler (Art Hsu) after a momentarily Godzilla-like showdown, he opened the cooler to find not his stolen heart, but... something, something vaguely but freakishly off-putting to even the steely likes of Chev -- he reacts to the effect of "Why would you possibly carry this around with you?" -- and then, naturally, we never find out what the cooler holds.

So, as many had likewise debated as to the contents of that briefcase in Pulp Fiction, I'd like to hear your theories on what exactly was in that cooler. Was it Jason Statham's hair? The script for the next Tyler Perry outing? A puppy?

("Whatever, I wanted a cat.")

On the eve of its release in 2006, some local pals accommodated me at their screening for the first Crank film, and when my reaction afterward was one of surprising enthusiasm, they kindly chalked it up to a matter of "demographics." (To them, this most recently excused my thoughts on Observe and Report as well.)

Three years later, I found myself attending a midnight show of Crank: High Voltage alongside plenty of demographically-appropriate (read: texting) kin, anxious to see just how Jason Statham's unstoppable hitman is going to beat the odds this time around. And three reels later, I began to wonder whether or not too much had finally become just that. Oh, dear... what if they told me to leave my brain at the door and my heart still wasn't in it?

Crank: High Voltage comes out this weekend, which sends Jason Statham back into a frenzied pinball movie world that has his sweaty bald head running at top speed to keep himself alive ... again. So if you want to keep your levels pegged at 11 this weekend, you might want to consider one of these other movies that have pure Russian racehorse levels of adrenaline pumping through their veins. When we say adrenaline fueled, we don't just mean hyperkinetic, no-attention-span-editing and lots of boring action sequences. That might even qualify Hannah Montana: The Movie for this list.

No, we mean you're on the edge of your seat, neck and shoulders tense, and eyeballs propped open like Malco McDowell in A Clockwork Orange. Cinematical urges you to try this at your own risk, and does not recommend any artery-clogging snacks in the midst of your movie madness. You'll need those suckers wide open to keep the heartpump chugging away, and you can consider yourself exercised for the month of April if you make it through at least three of these movies by Sunday.

Crank

Before writer-directors Neveldine and Taylor concocted another way to brutalize Jason Statham onscreen, they originally did it in this underrated film from 2006. I went into Crank with zero knowledge of the movie, other than the fact that the guy from the Transporter movies, Snatch, and Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels was in it. I'd hated the Transporter series, but loved the other two so I thought I'd give this a shot. 87 minutes later, I peeled my sweat-soaked back from the theater seat and staggered out to the car. This is non-stop, pure over the top action, and it's well worth seeing. Just take your meds before watching.

With only two features to their credit -- they co-wrote and co-directed 2006's Crank, and together scripted this past spring's Pathology -- maybe it's a bit premature to declare myself a fan of the duo known as Neveldine/Taylor. (Even if that's the case, Eugene's got my back.) Yes, I'm the guy psyched for Crank 2: High Voltage, and I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt for other upcoming projects, such as the Gerard Butler actioner Game and the comic book adaptation Jonah Hex...

Well, now, the latter's lost maybe only a fraction of what precious little interest it had, as Neveldine/Taylor has reportedly walked away from directing the project, citing (and say it with me now) "creative differences." However, the implication from this Variety brief is that their script is already done and will be the same one that Josh Brolin is still tapped to star in (to Thomas Jane's probable dismay).

Something tells me that a film that's gathered this much attention to date won't go unmade, but it's now a matter of who will helm it. 2009 will remain the year of N/T regardless, with Crank 2 scheduled to open in April and Game in September.

As I discovered yesterday, it doesn't always pay to make assumptions, so this time I'm going to let the news speak for itself. Over at AICN, a loyal reader and reviewer named "Sexy Whisk" managed to score a seat at an early preview of Gerard Butler's Game and provided us all with some very special deets. Judging from what they had to say, it's not looking good for the video game-inspired flick. So where to begin? According to the review, the action is a let down, the cast is wasted, and most of the film rides a fine line of creepy and offensive (if you don't believe me, you can read the full review here).

Game stars Butler as the leading player in an online fight to the death. This Running Man-style narrative has the added twist that the players in this game are controlled by the viewers (apparently by brain chips and nano-technology), but it all gets a little complicated from there. Remember, this is a movie from the men who brought you the Crank series, (Mark Neveldine and Brian Taylor) so it's not like realistic plot points are their specialty. Joining in on the fun are Michael C. Hall (Dexter) as the nefarious creator of the game, and Heroes' Milo Ventimiglia as another player with the charming name of Rick Rape.

Despite what "Sexy Whisk" might have to say, I guess that is the beauty of a movie review -- it's just one opinion after all. (And since this was a test screening, there's still a chance the filmmakers will change some things around.) So for those of us who can't say no to an action flick (or a shirtless Gerard Butler), keep in mind it is not over yet. Maybe Lionsgate will take the hint and perform a little spit polish and shine before Game hits theaters in 2009.

I've been burned by Jonah Hex rumors before, so this time I'm going to tread carefully ... very carefully. Hollywood Elsewhere reports they have reliable information that Josh Brolin (W.) has signed to star in WB's feature film version of DC Comics' Jonah Hex. According to Wells' "friend", it's a done deal -- but a top secret one. So in spite of protestations to the contrary from both Warner Bros. and Brolin's reps, Elsewhere believes they have the real dirt on the comic book adaptation

Hex was created by John Albano and Tony DeZuniga, and it centers on a disfigured bounty hunter who wanders the plains in a tattered confederate uniform. Hex had a rotating cast of villains, and the series was known for its rough-and-tumble plot lines and copious amounts of gore. Mark Neveldine and Brian Taylor (Crank) have already been hired to write and direct the flick, and not much is known about the story other than the fact that Jonah's "quest in the film is tracking down a voodoo practitioner." According to Elsewhere, there will be plenty of CGI and sci-fi overtones, and even though the earlier incarnations of Hex were strictly in the setting of the Wild West, as the series carried on Hex came up against plenty of supernatural bad guys – making the fantasy element of the flick not as far out as you may think.

I guess we'll have to wait and see if Brolin is really donning the six-shooters for Hex, or whether we'll just have to settle for the actor playing a different 'cowboy with a bad reputation'. So what do you think? Is Brolin a good match for Hex on the big screen? Sound off below....

"Rules Remain The Same, Except Some Changes."

I recall first seeing that tagline attached to a billboard touting The Transporter 3 at Cannes last May (whether or not I actually saw the picture at JoBlo.com then, all that matters is they still have it now) and dismissed it as a clumsy phrase with something perhaps lost in the translation from the European investors into big, fat, shiny English.

And yet IGN has the first domestic teaser up for the film, and that tagline appears nearly verbatim. I probably shouldn't care, and you probably don't, but it's just a further indication that even the filmmakers -- well, their marketing team -- have barely half a heart in this puppy.

In an age ruled by wussy PG-13 horror and sterilized action, the world cried out for a hero. And behold, for it has found one; actually, it has found two. Their names are Mark Neveldine and Brian Taylor -- usually credited as just "Neveldine/Taylor" -- and they have come to rescue us from the gutless, joyless, cynical genre films that seem to top the box-office more and more often with each passing year.

So far, Neveldine/Taylor have but two credits to their name: the deranged Jason Statham actioner Crank, and the screenplay for last weekend's twisted, frightening "medical" thriller Pathology. (Here I must respectfully dissent from my co-blogger Jeffrey M. Anderson's thoughtful negative review of the latter.) They've developed a clear m.o. -- gruesome, over-the-top violence, unhinged sexuality, frenetic plotting, a conscious disregard for plausibility -- and a certain contingent of filmgoers are eating it up with a spoon. I don't blame them: movies that don't pull their punches are pretty rare, and it's easy to love these two simply for having the fortitude to go balls-to-the-wall.

Warning: Possible spoilers below.

We at Cinematical have gleefully kept you updated on the status of the promised sequel to Brian Taylor and Mark Neveldine's crazy-ass live-action cartoon Crank. Thanks to what must be one of the most fascinating casting calls of all time, we now have more specifics about what's in store for Jason Statham's apparently invincible Chev Chelios. (If you recall, he ended the first film by plunging a mile from a helicopter and crashing onto the concrete landing on a car. [Thanks to commenter Liam for the correction.])

In addition to the details of how Chev survived the fall, which we already knew (he gets implanted with -- what else? -- an artificial heart which he has to jolt with electricity to keep pumping), The Bad and Ugly has snagged descriptions of a couple characters from the casting call for Crank 2: High Voltage. Among them are "Hu Dong," a 100 year-old Chinese gangster who implants Chev's old heart into himself and is then "lured into Doc Miles' clutches by the seductive Vanilla." I don't know what that means, but it sounds amazing. There's also "Pepper," a stripper who turns up in the back seat of a car that Chev steals and is somehow able to give Chev information about the whereabouts of one of his nemeses. Oh, and unless you're "OKAY WITH NUDITY" -- just like that, in all caps -- don't bother auditioning for "Pepper".

Ordinarily, reading tidbits like that about an upcoming studio release (Lionsgate is footing at least part of the bill) would send me scurrying under my desk to search for my jaw. But in the Taylor/Neveldine universe, which will also soon include the vicious-looking Pathology, it sounds like par for the course. I'm psyched.