RIP FRANK DOUBLEDAY...

You projected an impetuous look and style that made you so right for so many menacing roles, particularly those in John Carpenter's classics, "Assault on Precinct 13" and "Escape from New York". You were also a magnificent addition to such escapist yarns as "Avenging Angel"; "The Big Fix"; "Dollman"; "Butch and Sundance: the Early Years"; "L.A. Bounty"; "Nomads"; and the irreverent "First Nudie Musical". 

There was no one else quite like you, Mr. Doubleday, and unlikely anyone who'll ever reach your level of intensity. Bless your unique heart and legacy, dear friend. You'll be remembered always...

Solo: The Media's Stupid Spin And Remediation Advice (An Editorial)

We all know why "Solo: A Star Wars Story" flopped, with a box-office total that's catastrophically more abysmal than thought. The mainstream media may not wish to admit it, offering "Star Wars" fatigue as the reason (i.e., one film simply coming too soon on the heels of another to garner interest), but the truth is, "Solo" failed because many chose to sidestep it after "Last Jedi" soiled the intergalactic dream. 

Lucasfilm and nurturing Disney didn't help matters, either, by allowing Jonathan Kasdan; Kathleen Kennedy, Rian Johnson (remember when he called Mark Hamill a "mofo"?); and even once-could-do-no-wrong J.J. Abrams to scold fans, labeling them something they're not.

With that said, "Star Wars'" traditional base isn't adverse to diversity--never has been, never will be. Its members are, however, adverse to any form of prejudice, particularly reverse discrimination, whether regarding gender (males) or mystical notions. ("Last Jedi'"s dreadful destruction of a sacred temple by a respected puppet couldn't help but upset.) That the new handlers of George Lucas' creation have chosen this wayward, abrasive and unapologetic course is what baffles and offends so many. 

Diversity in storytelling can, in fact, be administered in a number of ways. Gene Roddenberry; George A. Romero; Ray Bradbury; Rod Serling; and Glen A. Larson have handled it via a variety of voices. The various producers of "The Walking Dead"; "Planet of the Apes"; "Alien Nation"; "X-Men" and the recent "Bright" offer such in a way that gains acceptance even from people of opposing, political views. But you know what? Lucas dealt the diversity card, too, and all through a throwback style that rode on pure fun and never once did he bash a soul. He did weave some embellishing philosophy into his fun, but fun was the primary goal and mission attained, provided I might add, by host of eclectic characters.

Male bashing, therefore, was never part of "Star Wars", any more than female bashing. Contrary to what SJWs claim, the "Star Wars" wheel wasn't broken prior to "Last Jedi" (or for that matter, "Force Awakens"), even in light of the prequel trilogy stumbling here and there. A radical purging of the saga's good-vs-evil themes needn't have occurred through this unsystematic process. "Star Wars'" purpose was pure, clear and effective--and embraced unconditionally from the start. 

In all fairness, "Solo" isn't way off base in its reflection of this. Even with the conspicuous recasting of Alden Ehrenreich and Donald Glover in iconic roles, "Solo" is superior (more open-minded) than "Last Jedi" in its presentation of the old ways. If not for the dreadful "Episode VIII", the smuggler's pre-story may have struck lightning at the box office. However, many fans feared that if they had supported it, there was a strong chance that Lucasfilm would continue its "Last Jedi" vibe, not only into "Episode IX", but the possible "Solo II". (For the record, "Solo" does have a SJW smattering about it, but it's nowhere near as bad as many feared. The film slips by avoiding a rough edge: something that its anthology companion, "Rogue One", at least keeps.)

Again, "Solo" dropped the ball because the peasants chose to chastise the ruling class, and truly, that's all. (Keep in mind, "Infinity War" hit theaters only a few weeks after "Black Panther", and "Deadpool 2" a few weeks after "Infinity War": each a blockbuster and with the same adventurous pledge as "Star Wars". People flock to this sort of stuff, unless they've been betrayed.) Anyway, most of the peasants will eventually see "Solo" (and probably find it bland, but on the whole, okay), but whether good or bad, the core fans had staunch reason to postpone their allegiance, though I suppose their boycotting was also an ironic (and shrewd) way of acknowledging the film (ha, ha). 

Because of the fans' stance, Lucasfilm and Disney must get their houses in order. That requires an acceptance of the truth and a change of command, perhaps even getting good, old George back into the chair, if only in a consultant capacity. Maybe having him team with the "Infinity War" group would be an ideal way to go. 

At the same time, it's understandable to keep the franchise fresh and growing with new characters and circumstances, but they must project the original "Star Wars" spin: that means sticking to the white hat/black hat, chapter-play format.

To help with this, why not cast Scott Eastwood as a protagonist? (Heck, he'd make a nifty Flash Gordon, come to think of it.) And before you snowflakes condemn the idea of casting another guy in a lead, one could just as well recruit a tough-as-nails lady to pull in the reins: an Ellen Ripley or Michonne type, if you please. She could be flawed, but strong, wise and easy to applaud, instead of some flavorless wannabe or hardheaded nag. 

New characters can also express diverse dispositions and tendencies, without fear of screwing with the saga's canon. They don't even have to be human. They only need to emote some degree of depth and get audiences to care about them, just like folks did with Lucas' ensemble in '77. But when it comes to villainy, keep it standard, vicious and long lasting: Enough of this hit-and-miss, guest-starring silliness.

Even if the bigwigs won't admit it, there's much riding on how Lucasfilm now proceeds and how Disney reacts to its satellite's plans. It'll be interesting to see what develops in the upcoming months and what manipulative or honorable scraps on "Episode IX" and the Boba Fett film are shared. Thanks to "Solo'"s misfortune, there's again hope that things might turn around. If not, the franchise is destined to enter a long and unceremonious hiatus by decade's end; and oh, what an unforgivable disgrace that would be the present producers. 

IN GRATITUDE AND RESPECT...MEMORIAL DAY 2018...

I saw Bland Solo...

There was much that could go right or wrong with "Solo: A Star Wars Story". Many have said that its success or failure would determine Disney and Lucasfilm's long-term plans for the space-opera franchise. 

The signs haven't been promising. "Lego Movie" guys Phil Lord and Chris Miller were fired for allegedly lampooning Lawrence and Jonathan Kasdan's script. Talented and faithful Ron Howard then hopped aboard to save the day, but some questioned whether the Kasdans' vision was salvageable after so much material had been shot. (It ended up that Howard re-shot most of the footage.) For that matter, had the cast been up to task, particularly Alden "Twixt" Ehrenreich? He didn't necessarily look or sound like Harrison Ford, i.e. Han Solo, and was it true that an acting coach had been hired to help him improve his characterization? And what about Donald Glover's Lando Calrissian being bi/pansexual? If true, what a surprising turn, considering what's been long established for the icon, not only in film, but in comics and novels. 

With the deck seemingly stacked against it, most have been sitting on pins and needles speculating on "Solo'"s outcome, wondering whether it might be as polarizing as "Last Jedi". Most will be surprised to find that, in addition to the film being far from a failure, its prime shortcoming isn't a matter of radical departure, but rather blandness. 

The directorial pace is at least competent (as Howard was destined to provide), but Kasdans' script seems like a tamed, is-it-or-isn't-it? western, plagued by G-rated boundaries (despite its PG-13 classification), with pivotal, action scenes softened to a point that would make even the unerring Rey prickle. 

It's so damn frustrating, because the plot's premise implies raucous promise: Woody Harrelson's crafty Tobias Beckett sets forth to steal from the big-time, corporate Empire, in a galactic allegory of a train robbery. Young Solo grasps the chance to join the heist, not only due to his inherent recklessness, but then to reunite with a lost love named Qui'ra (Emila "Game of Thrones"/"Terminator Genisys"), who's destined to become an integral part of an even greater undertaking. 

In addition to the smitten couple, Beckett's adventurous tangents include (at various points throughout) the aforementioned Calrissian; sharp-shootin' Val (Thandie "Westworld" Newton); robotic, equal-rights advocate, L3-37 (Phoebe "The Cafe" Waller-Bridge); and honorable wing-Wookie, Chewbacca (Joonas Suotamo). The Millennium Falcon acts as much as character as in other "Star Wars" adventures; and Marvel Avengers veterans Paul Bettany, as Dryden Vos (originally portrayed by Michael K. Williams prior to Lord/Miller's departure) and Jon Favreau, as Rio Durant (Beckett's loyal, multi-hand man), bridge the jaunts for some crossover oomph. On the surface, one might consider the combination as eclectic and purposeful as "Rogue One'"s. 

Though it may have once seemed odd for "Cheers" favorite, Harrelson to costar in a "Star Wars" feature, his associations with "Zombieland", "The Hunger Games" and "War for the Planet of the Apes" (for which his Colonel Kurtz should have clinched an Oscar nod) make him an ideal imagi-movie fit. Beckett emerges as a plebeian, if not questionable Obi-Wan: his slippery shadiness guiding and enforcing events, which eventually lead to Solo's famed Kessel Run. His interaction with the young smuggler, as well as the other personalities, is smooth and credible, even if Ford's absence stays conspicuous throughout. (Ehrenreich is a swell actor, but his style is much different than Ford's, though why would it have been otherwise? This goes, as well, for Glover when compared to Billy Dee Williams.) 

In addition to Beckett's flavorful inclusion, the pre-Han/Leia romance and budding Solo/Chewy dynamic add some levity to the plot (and man, does Chewy ever shine in the best "I am Groot" way). However, these relationships reflect much of the supporting-character interplay, which is buffered by obligatory squabbles that never become as intense as they could or should. That's a shame, because the ongoing circumstances require realistic, contentious tension (even of a quasi comical kind) to fortify the story's foreboding passage.  

Blasters may be fired, but "Solo" never once gets down and dirty during its two-hour-plus running time. There's no long-term, stand-out villain (Bettany's Vos is effective, but in dire need of extension); no loathsome bloodshed or grandiloquent sacrifices for the causes displayed. (Death in "Solo" is generally fast and hollow.) This distances the prequel from what old Lucasfilm would have produced (the Ewok movies included) and becomes ever more obvious when one dares to link the film to a certain man accused of shooting first. 

As for Solo's roguish competition (a candidate for his own solo film and from whom some occasional, snappy chatter does enter), Calrissian faithfully deploys the charm, or is it the con? No matter. We've come to expect both from the character, but how 'bout that reputed, mythology-changing, sexual-fluidity slant? Does it rise in Glover's version, and if so, how much does it tangle the tale?

Ultimately, that controversial component thrives no more than it does in the film's second trailer. People can debate the vague interlude as much as they want, but really, folks, it doesn't become what many feared. For the record, I'm glad the alleged novelty is a dud (though, per the Kasdans' insinuations, it could yet invade a different prequel/sequel--dear lord), but to play devil's advocate, what's at best implied is but another example of the film's exasperating restraint: a blunting stunt to keep the playing field safe, so as not to offend varying viewers. 

This need for compromise prevents "Solo" from progressing in either direction. That's good in one sense, since we damn well didn't need another SJW reinvention, but the approach also reduces the story into consistent, mamby-pamby ambivalence. To instigate this drawback, there's just enough cowboy residue in parts to make one wonder why it never matches the smuggling scoundrel we met (or will meet) in "A New Hope".  

"New Hope'"s western influence once led its intrepid competitors to install a dusty flavor into their own allegorical tales. The proof prevails in Glen A. Larson's "Battlestar Galactica"; Luigi Cozzi's "Starcrash"; William Sax's "Galaxina"; Roger Corman/Jimmy T. Murakami's "Battle Beyond the Stars"; Peter Hyams' "Outland"; and John Carpenter's "Escape from New York". These science-fiction efforts are proud to exploit the cowboy concept to the max. (Now, that I think of it, so does George Miller's Mad Max quartet.)  "Solo" could have taken the formula even higher, enough to have made it "The Good, the Bad and the Wookie".  Instead, the film remains spasmodic with its western roots, not to mention the broad, fantastic foundation from which its titular hero sprang.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again: To succeed, "Star Wars" must get back to the basics. It gained mass appeal in '77 because it recalled the legacies of John Carter, Buck Rogers and Flash Gordon, in addition to those of Gene Autry, Roy Rogers and Hopalong Cassidy. It didn't play it safe or take a pre-politically correct stance. It told a solid story of good vs evil, with charred death, doleful annihilation and euphoric triumph as reasonable parts of its landscape. 

In all honesty, it doesn't matter who stars in these films (a shaky, high-school portrayal of Hamlet is still Hamlet); who directs them (whether upcoming satirists or respected veterans); who emulates John Williams' cues...if CGI or old-school techniques are used. If the characters and their stories stray from what they're meant to be, by being too bold or reserved, no one will stay loyal to the cause. New fans won't latch on; old ones will fall to the wayside. Many already have.  

I dunno. Perhaps there's still a chance to salvage this once admired-across-the-board franchise, to keep it in good graces with those who've loved it from the start, while attracting new followers. I mean, gee whiz, "Solo" can't be the end of the line, can it? After all, Disney intends to enchant folks with Favreau's small-screen series (although SJWs have already denounced it sight unseen) and of course, "Episode IX" hovers on the horizon. 

Then again, if one considers J.J. Abrams' recent, stupid-ass, social-justice declaration and Kathleen Kennedy's dictatorial craving to produce a Rian Johnson "Star Loves" trilogy, is there any real, new hope of reinstating the basics? Shucks, blandness might be the least of our concerns...

SO LONG, CLINT WALKER...

You were a towering man who played towering parts, whose affable aura made Cheyenne Bodie one of television's most celebrated cowboys.

On the big screen, you started small, but left a distinct impression as a Tarzan imprint in the Bowery Boys' "Jungle Gents", which then led to a cameo in the epic "Ten Commandments". Thereafter, you occupied a barrage of rough-and-tough action yarns, including "The Dirty Dozen"; "Fort Dobbs"; "Gold of the Seven Saints"; "The Great Bank Robbery"; "Maya"; "More Dead Than Alive"; "None But the Brave"; "Pancho Villa"; "Sam Whisky"; "Yellowstone Kelly"; "Yuma"; and the nail-biting "Night of the Grizzly". 

You also swaggered your way into the weird and wonderful, with such productions as "Scream of the Wolf"; "Killdozer!"; "The Mysterious Island of Beautiful Women"; "The Serpent Warriors"; "Snowbeast"; and "The White Buffalo". 

Beyond a doubt, Mr. Walker, you were a hero to many, whether on or off the screen. Lord knows we need more of your virtuous likes these days, but we'll at least be grateful that your legendary stature blessed us for all these many decades. 

FAREWELL, PATRICIA MORISON...

You were, in so many respects, the queen of the eclectic, covering musicals, film noir, action/adventure and horror, with entries that include "Tarzan and the Huntress"; "Queen of the Amazons"; "Beyond the Blue Horizon"; "Calling Dr. Death"; "Hitler's Madman"; "Lady on a Train"; "Persons in Hiding"; "Song of the Thin Man"; and "Dressed to Kill" (aka, "Sherlock Holmes and the Secret Code").

Your beauty existed on a celestial level, Ms. Morison, radiating each and every film in which you appeared. May your starring role in the Great Beyond be as illustrious as it has been in so many of your wonderful pictures.

RIP YURIKO HOSHI...

Your cinematic career was long and prolific, distinguished by the period-piece action classic, "Sengoku Yaro" and the deeply speculative "The Last War". However to Toho kaiju fans, you'll be remembered best for your dazzling roles in Ishiro Honda's monster team-ups, "Mothra vs Godzilla" ("Godzilla vs the Thing"/"Godzilla vs Mothra") and "Ghidorah/Ghidrah, the Three-Headed Monster" ("The Greatest Battle on Earth"); as well as Masaaki Tezuka's revisionist "Godzilla vs Megaguirus", where you at long last returned to the giant-monster genre to the delight of your many fans.

You were truly a beauty among the beasts, the epitome of style and a graceful talent for the ages. There's no doubt that your charming essence will continue to captivate into the epic hereafter.

I saw Deadpool's Second Coming...

Awright!!! Ryan Reynolds' Deadpool, aka Wade Wilson/Merc the Mouth, is back and not too soon. His garrulous presence stands in direct, abrasive defiance of all the teens who'd have once flocked to the anti-hero's big-screen adventures, but now scorn such storytelling in the name of goose-stepping "sensitivity". 

Directed by David "Atomic Blonde" Leitch and scripted by Reynolds, Paul Wernick, and Rhett Reese, "Deadpool 2", like its predecessor, glorifies uniqueness as a brutal (and amusing) justice-brandishing tool. Reynolds makes it all jive, giving the irreverent mutant the unabashed, Looney Tunes vantage that sets his flick apart from even the most colorful of the current pack. Alas, as a second-comer, "Deadpool 2" isn't as fresh as the first, but so be it. It's no less entertaining for its extrapolated, shoot-from-the-hip gall.

This time Rob Liefeld and Fabian Nicieza's Marvel celebrated creation protects a troubled, mutant lad named Firefist, aka Russell Collins (Julian "Paper Planes" Dennison), from extermination. The reason: The kid is to become a futuristic, mass murderer, but his fate might be altered, if only someone were to inspire him to turn the other cheek. 

The set-up ushers in Cable, aka Nathan Summers (Josh "Jonah Hex" Brolin, who's still ridin' high from his Thanos portrayal in "Infinity War") as the tale's time-travelin' cyborg-soldier and temporary antagonist, who sports a big gun, a teddy bear and projects the vengeful, if not justified need to kill the Human Torch heir apparent. Deadpool, of course, has other ideas, thanks to the discovery of his big heart.

To accompany his new mission, Deadpool has help (at varying points) from his established friends: Negasonic Teenage Warhead (Brianna "Tragedy Girls" Hildebrand); Colossus (Stephan "Big Miracle" Kapicic); Weasel (T.J. "Cloverfield" Miller); Dopiner (Karin "Ghostbusters" Soni); Blind Al (the legendary Leslie Uggams); and the fetching Vanessa (Morena "Gotham" Baccarin), who becomes both doomed and blessed due to the story's ethereal dynamics. 

The old crew is joined by lucky Domino (Zazie Beetz); brain-bending Bedlam (Terry "The Thing" Crews); regurgitating Zeitgiest (Bill "It" Skarsgard); cocky Shatterstar (Lewis "Iron Fist" Tan); and average-guy-along-for-the-ride Peter (Robert "Bad Robots" Delaney): a knock-off of Marvel's enduring secret agent, Peter Wisdom. This add-on, motley crew distinguishes Wilson's X-Force team and through the assembly, our mad mercenary is able to fortify his sense of purpose and plan...well, maybe not. Most of the newbies don't last long, but hey, it's the valiant thought that counts.

The plot, as such, is never complex, nor need it be. The save-or-kill-the-kid premise brackets Wilson's wild tangents and vignettes, making "Deadpool 2" resemble a rough, reinterpreted "Laugh-In". Older fans will appreciate the approach; younger ones will (or would) miss the point, since most lack the daring decency to sneak a peek at any R-rated film or for that matter, any far-out fantasy, unless it's perhaps tradition-stompin' fodder like "Last Jedi". 

The film's jarring structure is fine, however, considering how well it fits Wilson's personality swings. Reynolds enables Deadpool's self-parodying stance to connect the outrageous dots (most of which turn cartoonishly violent), ultimately creating a sensible strand. The process is surreal as hell, but against conventional odds, it works like a charm, at least when one grows accustomed to it. (Fans of the first film will latch on without a hitch.)

Now, I must confess, Deadpool isn't generally my kind of superhero, but I'm still cool with him. His hyperactive crassness is what makes him fascinating: an alternative icon who, for whatever spontaneous cause, consistently strikes the right, unapologetic chord. Over and over, that's the ticket here: Deadpool breaks the rules, and the types of rules he breaks deserve to be broken, at least in the abstract way they're presented. 

Deadpool is also the embodiment of "Suicide Squad" with a wry, intrepid twist, layering on manic and mature expression for older moviegoers who've long had their fill of sugar-coated, Hitler Jugend mysticism and its consequential, fumigated wand-shaking. He reminds us that it's okay (maybe even essential) to dance on the edge, especially when dictatorial goons declare, "Don't!" 

"Deadpool 2", however, isn't afraid to layer such rebellion with chunks of family-spun sentimentality. In fact, both films drill the importance of family into one's head, but the mutant's marinated fans already know the score, having acquired this idiosyncratic benefaction through Marvel's pages. The X-Men, after all, do care about one another, as much as the members of any dysfunctional family can and will. 

Even with this precious message bleeding through its crazed antics, the self-proclaimed highbrows will probably condemn "Deadpool 2". On the other hand, those jerkenheimers do deserve some thanks, if only for making Deadpool a sensation among those who get his skewed shtick: I'm talkin' hard-workin' folks who are more than pleased to pay their hard-earned cash for wisecrackin' camaraderie. At the end of any sweat-brow day, that's the emblematic desire of any unsung class. Thank goodness, Deadpool is the ideal deplorable to deliver it.