Friday, August 6, 2010

Lethal Weapon 4

Year 2, Day 218 - 8/6/10 - Movie #584

BEFORE: As long as we're on the topic of buddy-cop films set in L.A., there's this one. I know I've seen "Lethal Weapon" (who hasn't) and back in 1989 I saw WAY too much of "Lethal Weapon 2", while working at a movie theater. "Lethal Weapon 3"? I'm about 75% sure I've seen that one. But I know for a fact that I never saw the 4th installment.


THE PLOT: With personal crises and age weighing in on them, LAPD officers Riggs and Murtaugh must contend with a deadly Chinese crimelord trying to get his brother out of prison.

AFTER: You probably thought I'd use this space to denounce Mel Gibson for his latest round of racist and misogynistic comments, with new recordings surfacing almost every day, as recorded by his Russian girlfriend. Why would I, when they're so much darn fun? Though they kind of make me long for the days of calling female cops "Sugah Tits" - good times, good times. Anyway, in Hollywood you're only as good as your latest hit movie, or as bad as your last scandalous behavior. Anyway, this is how I choose to remember Mel Gibson, the days of "Lethal Weapon" and "Mad Max" films.

The storyline here involves Chinese gangs, guilty of both slavery and counterfeiting, while cop team of Riggs (Mel Gibson, last seen in "Mad Max: Beyond Thunderdome") and Murtaugh (Danny Glover, last seen in "Predator 2") are on the verge of becoming a father and grandfather, respectively.

This is a solid action film, though the franchise by this point had gotten weighed down with all the excess characters that signed on in Parts 2 and 3. You wonder if they made Rigg's girlfriend pregnant so we wouldn't have to see her for most of the picture...

Another plot point is the police department's loss of insurance (can that happen?) so our heroes are promoted to police captains, to keep them off the streets where they tend to damage things. I'm not sure why this was added to the plot, since it doesn't keep them from damaging things - they run a car right through a freakin' office building in the movie's car chase scene. So, since L.A.P.D. had no insurance at the time, I guess the city went bankrupt.

I'm not exactly an action-movie junkie (or a fan of karate movies, for that matter), but this one certainly kept me awake and interested - so it's loud, anyway. The stunts are quite a bit over the top, but no less entertaining for it. And there was enough light comedy in it to keep it light in places.

Also starring Joe Pesci (last seen in "Raging Bull"), Rene Russo (last seen in "Get Shorty"), Chris Rock (last heard in "Madagascar 2"), and Jet Li (last seen in "The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor") with cameos from Darlene Love and Richard Libertini.

RATING: 7 out of 10 romance novels

2 comments:

  1. I think I bailed on the series after the first one. Or the second one. Wait, no...did I skip over the second one, and then saw the third one on cable? The damned things tend to blur together.

    I think I'd be on board with these things if Hollywood changed their methodology and stopped titling sequels as "Slack Tracer 6: Depper Momentus." Some of my favorite movies are parts of series: "The Thin Man," the Hope and Crosby "Road" movies, the Holy Trilogy...even "Columbo" feels like a collection of small-studio movies instead of a bunch of 2-hour TV episodes. And then of course there's the Bond series.

    Somehow, it's an easier sell. "We've developed some great characters and every two or three years, after our writers and actors have been on other projects, we're all eager to return to that world and think up a fresh story to tell with them" works for me. As opposed to "After Macaulay Culkin triggered that mechanism which launched a concrete garden gnome straight into Daniel Stern's nuts, there were so many unanswered questions; we felt that the story practically demanded a followup."

    ReplyDelete
  2. Andy, I say this very rarely, but I'm not sure I get your point. You like series, you don't like series, but some of your favorite films are parts of series? Your issue is just with the way that sequels are titled? What are you calling an "easier sell"? Please to clarify.

    ReplyDelete