Such a bad movie. Confusing. Slow. Devoid of action. Dull. No decent action scenes.
Michael Caine replaced James Caan. Caine is bad. Everyone is bad. Incomptent. Finale is a press conference. No sex, no intrigue, no suspense.
This was an abomination.
This gets off to a slow start with Parker being betrayed feeling very rote, and the baddies not really bad more amiable, and Parker raising cash from other jobs too easily. But it picks up when he arrives in town and befriends Leslie. These two have a nice by play and she's enjoyable and it's great that Parker gets really badly injured and can't do what he normally can.
John Cleese argued this wasn't a success in the states because it was too indigenous. Maybe - also the film is very stressful with Cleese failing upon failing. And he doesn't really deserves it. Basil Fawlty deserves to suffer. Maybe if his character had a romance with Penelope Wilton, was unhappily married, fell for his ex. I liked the subversion of the teen girl who was having an affair with another student. Maybe it needed a baddy as well - someone even worse.
Its deftly written and some very funny moments. But it kind of hits the same beat - "the poor bastard".
Sweet. Great music. Virgina Madsen so lovely. Too much Lenny Van Dohlen who isn't up to it.
The sort of movie you want to be good because its heart is in the right place it's trying to be good but it's just not fun. The vibe is wrong. The leads have no chemistry.
Interesting for its second wave femininsm. Maybe better off establishing he's a yob and finding an excuse to have him go with her than have him lie?
What happened on this movie? Did they not understand what made the first work?
The first had really interesting characters - doomed men, with no future, looking for a cause, men out of shape.
This is mostly about Scott Glenn as a gloomy mercenary from Lebannon. Edward Fox plays Richard Burton's brother from the first one. Why didn't they use someone with a bit more life? Like Oliver Reed, Peter O'Toole? Maybe they tried. Fox is just pompous.
There's a throwback to the first film in a training montage. But it's super short. Then a training sergeant yells at a former IRA man then just kills him. Whose dumb idea was that?
The story feels so repetitive. Scott Glenn gets hauled into a car. Then Barbara Carrera. Then Glenn again.
Why didn't they lean into them being mercenaries?
Random plots like Carrera and Glenn falling in love, and a network paying for it, and Carrera's brother helping, and there's a double agent (actually that's not bad), and the Russian foisting an IRA man on them, and the IRA giving Fox LSD. And it ends with Hess (Laurence Olivier) deciding to go back.
No stakes - no reason to bust him out.
Just shit.
Interesting to see Laurence Olivier as if he's going to die, Ingrid Pitt as a hooker working for the Russians and Patruck Stewart. Nice views of Germany.
So much better than the film it's not funny. Brilliantly tight, gripping account which starts with Parker in a robbery - dodgy driver crashes, Parker seeks refuge in a fun park, is seen by corrupt cops and crooks who figure out he's got money so don't turn him in but go after the money. So it's a siege story.
Why didn't they film this instead of stupid stuff about killing a nine year old girl and being killed off one by one (here he kills a gangster which annoys a crime lord but that's so much better). In the film Parker (called Stone) was a whimp, an idiot, who only shoots one person. Here he's a complete bad ass.
I guess there's a lot of internal action but you could add a character for Parker to talk to.
