Connect with us

Movie Reviews

Rob’s Car Movie Review: Double Nickels (1977)

Published

on

Rob’s Car Movie Review: Double Nickels (1977)

From the 1980s through to today, the majority of car movies tend to be comfortably budgeted and widely released productions from major studios or distribution entities. Films like The Cannonball Run, Need for Speed, John Wick, and Ford v. Ferrari relied on big-money stars and massive advertising campaigns to spread awareness of the movie and bring in those box office dollars.

In the 1970s, however, the opposite was more commonly true.

Low-budget films produced through the efforts of independent companies were churned out by the dozen, often aimed at the drive-in movie crowd. They usually relied on an easy-to-digest high concept, rarely featured an actor you had ever heard of, and were less than stellar in terms of storytelling and technical proficiency. Falling into this category were such pictures as Bobby Jo and the Outlaw, Moonshine County Express, King of the Mountain, and Van Nuys Blvd.

While I have watched a number of these types of movies in the past, one that I had never heard of before recently came to my attention, and I thought for this month’s episode of Rob’s Car Movie Review, I’d give it a review.

Advertisement

So, without further delay, I present to you Double Nickels (1977)!

The theatrical, one-sheet movie poster for Double Nickels. (Image courtesy of Smokey Productions.)

Double Nickels was produced and distributed in the United States by Smokey Productions. Having worked on H.B. Halicki’s prior low-budget movies, the original 1974 version of Gone in 60 Seconds and he Junkman, a relative unknown, Jack Vacek, took it upon himself to try his hand at being an auteur filmmaker. He wrote, directed, produced, edited, acted, and performed stunts in the picture.

Performing alongside of Vacek was an ensemble of totally unknown actors, including Trice Schubert, Edward Abrahms, Heidi Schubert, George Cole, Tex Taylor, and Mick Brennan.

Shot in my current place of residence, Malibu, California, and other locations in the Los Angeles area on a micro-budget of $150,000, Double Nickels tells the story of a pair of California Highway Patrolmen, Smokey (Vacek) and Ed (Abrahms), who monitor a strip of the US1 Pacific Coast Highway.

Advertisement

Jack Vacek as the main protagonist, California Highway Patrolman, Smokey. (Photo courtesy of Smokey Productions.)

A chance encounter with a speeder, George (Cole) who purports to be in the auto repossession business, leads Smokey and Ed to moonlight for George, ostensibly taking back sports and luxury cars that the owners have failed to make payments on.

The two lawmen prove highly adept at boosting cars, successfully outwitting the owners, and on a couple of occasions, the police, whom they must stay clear of, since moonlighting is against Highway Patrol policy.

All is going well as the two rake in the extra dollars to supplement their Highway Patrol paychecks, until Smokey and Ed discover that the cars they have been reclaiming were not, in fact, being financed by any financial institution. They confront George with this information, who promises to question the man who has been bankrolling his repossession business.

Edward Abrahms as Highway Patrolman, Ed. (Photo courtesy of Smokey Productions.)

Advertisement

George delivers a car personally to his backer, Lewis Sloan (Taylor), and queries the man about the nature of his business. Sloan, in a not-so-veiled threat, tells George to mind his own business, prompting George to tell Smokey and Ed that he believes they have all unwittingly gotten themselves mixed up in an auto theft ring.

Realizing their jobs and their very freedom is in Jeopardy, Smokey, Ed, and George go to Sloan’s home and take back one of the cars they had previously boosted. Subsequently, a high-speed pursuit develops between our protagonists and Sloan, setting up a climactic final act that will decide who prevails.

Double Nickels is perhaps the quintessential 1970s B-movie, as it contains all the aforementioned technical deficiencies of the species and much more.

George the repo man, portrayed by George Cole. (Photo courtesy of Smokey Productions.)

For starters, to my eye, the film was likely shot on Super-16mm and blown up to 35mm for distribution to reduce film stock costs. As a result, the movie is left with a squarish aspect-ratio and huge globs of grain in the image. The version I watched was probably transferred from a very old print that had color-shifted over the years, as the color palate leans heavily towards magenta. I actually didn’t mind this so much, as it lends the film a seedy, 1970s look that films like Boogie Nights strived to recreate decades later.

Advertisement

The other technical aspects, such as the live sound recordings and editing, are also quite poor. Sometimes, you simply cannot hear the dialogue or follow the action. Sloppy jump cuts and abrupt scene exits are scattered throughout.

As was the case in the previously mentioned 1974 incarnation of Gone in 60 Seconds, the acting is pretty much abysmal, with the often laughable and ludicrous written words from the screenplay not doing the thespians any favors.

Tex Taylor as auto theft kingpin, Lewis Sloan. (Photo courtesy of Smokey Productions.)

Likewise, the story itself is nothing to write home about, either. The idea that a pair of cops could not see what they were getting themselves into with the repossession scheme is fairly ridiculous and fails to suspend disbelief. The tone of the story also shifts incongruously from drama to over-the-top slapstick comedy at times.

Having just trashed the film, you might find it incredible that I managed to enjoy it to a degree.

Advertisement

The movie’s running time is a mere 88 minutes, so it doesn’t represent a major ask for your time. On a personal level, it was fun for me to see how Malibu’s scenery and landmarks had changed over the decades before I moved here.

The movie aptly captures the halcyon lifestyle of 1970s Southern California. (Photo courtesy of Smokey Productions.)

The movie also acts as a snapshot of 1970s Southern California in the laconic, beach-and-sun-and-chicks-in-bikinis lifestyle that it presents. Hillarious and kitschy are the hairstyles, mustaches, and wide-lapeled, open shirts and bell-bottomed jeans throughout. Gen-Xers like me just love that stuff as it reminds us of our childhoods.

What’s more, the movie delivers in spades in terms of the automotive action.

While we are not presented with multitudes of raucous, high-end muscle cars from the era, likely because the film’s miniscule budget didn’t permit procuring them, we are treated to a few icons of the period.

Advertisement

Smokey drives this awesome 1968 Chevy Chevelle SS in the film’s climactic chase sequence. (Photo courtesy of Smokey Productions.)

The two best cars are the ones that are used in the 17-minute car chase that ends the movie: a 1968 Chevy Chevelle SS and a ‘73 Chevrolet Corvette C3.

The Chevelle, driven by Smokey, is unusual in that it is painted in code MM Burnished Saddle Metallic, a rare medium brown color, with white over-the-top stripes. It features aftermarket mag wheels, a black interior, and, as we see multiple times, is equipped with a manual transmission, which Smokey aggressively rows.

The C3 is driven by Sloan, who consistently chomps on a cigar while sawing at the steering wheel, with his henchman in the passenger seat occasionally leaning out of the window to fire off rounds at Smokey’s car with his .45.

Lewis Sloan uses this Bright Orange ’73 Corvette to pursue Smokey. (Photo courtesy of Smokey Productions.)

Advertisement

The ‘Vette looks fantastic in code 86 Bright Orange with a black interior, and is an automatic transmission car. Sadly, we never get a look under the hood of either car, but do hear their V8s roar throughout the spectacular pursuit.

Another car that features prominently in the film is Smokey’s dilapidated 1957 Chevrolet Task-Force 3100 series pick-up.

Smokey’s 1957 Chevrolet Task-Force 3100 series pick-up is used in a chase sequence in the Los Angeles River. (Photo courtesy of Smokey Productions.)

Seemingly ancient and covered in peeling paint and primer, the truck features a manual transmission and is involved in multiple chase sequences, including one in the Los Angeles River.

Other vehicles in the movie include multiple Cadillacs, a wild dune buggy, 1970s-style custom vans, super-cool 1974 Dodge Monaco and ’72 Plymouth Satellite police cars, George’s gorgeous 1977 Mercedes-Benz 450 SEL, a 1966 Lincoln Continental with suicide doors, and Smokey’s 1975 Norton Commando 750 for motorcycle fans.

Advertisement

Though far from being a hot car, I’d be remiss in not mentioning the 1971 Ford Pinto that Ed escapes from the cops in by driving it down several flights of stairs. Quite a stunt!

Even the movie’s police cars, like this 1972 Plymouth Satellite are cool. (Photo courtesy of Smokey Productions.)

If you go into Double Nickels forewarned that it is no Citizen Kane and that it possesses some of the worst technical and storytelling facets of 1970s low-budget filmmaking, it’s not impossible to enjoy the movie.

I tend to liken it to something you might watch if it was the only thing on TV at 3 am or if you were sick in bed. For all its bad acting and implausible plot machinations, it does nostalgically capture a Southern California that once existed and has some enviable cars and superb pursuits in it.

As such, I give Jack Vacek’s magnum opus five out of ten pistons.

Advertisement

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Movie Reviews

Is ‘Josie and the Pussycats’ (2001) Really Even A Rock N Roll Movie? (FILM REVIEW) – Glide Magazine

Published

on

Is ‘Josie and the Pussycats’ (2001) Really Even A Rock N Roll Movie? (FILM REVIEW) – Glide Magazine

The satirical romp Josie and the Pussycats (2001) is a fun movie. But is it a great rock ‘n’ roll movie?
Eh, not so fast on that second one. Welcome back to Glide’s quest for what makes a good rock ‘n’ roll movie. Last month, we looked at Almost Famous, a great launching pad because it gets so much right. And every first Friday, we’ll take another look at a rock ‘n’ movie and ask what it means in the larger pantheon. This month, the Glide’s screening room brings you Josie and the Pussycahttps://glidemagazine.com/322100/almost-perfect-why-almost-famous-sets-the-gold-standard-for-rock-movies/ts. The film is a live-action take on the classic comic-and-cartoon property of a sugary, all-girl rock trio that exists in the world of Riverdale, a.k.a. fictional home of the iconic Archie Andrews.

But this Josie has next to nothing to do with Riverdale and is instead a satire of consumerism and ’00s boy bands. A worthy target, and a topic that has stayed worthy in the quarter-century since Josie dropped. The film was not a hit, but it has become something of a cult classic (like many movies featured in this series).

The plot is fairly simple. Wyatt Frame, an evil corporate type, is making piles of money off boy band Du Jour. They start to wise up to his evil scheme and have to be… taken care of. Frame needs a new group to front his plot, which revolves around mind control to push consumer culture. Enter Josie and the Pussycats, who are about to have a whirlwind ride to the top. And along the way, foil a plot with tentacles so far-reaching they have ensnared… Carson Daly?

Josie is a fun, clever movie, but it doesn’t have a whole lot to say about real rock ‘n’ roll, unless you want to simply accept a perspective that it’s just another cynical consumer-driven product. Even that is an argument that can be made, as long as you’re willing to ignore underground and indie scenes and passionate artists making amazing music.

And it is true that this is a theme of Josie. The band triumphs at the end via their authentic music. But it somehow doesn’t feel authentic, which makes it something of a hollow victory. Let’s consider the criteria already established for a good rock ‘n’ roll movie, and how Josie delivers on that front. The first is in the characters department. The film dodges the previously established Buckethead Paradox, which states that “The real-life rock stars are so much larger than life that you can’t make up credible fictional versions. There is no way someone like Buckethead would come out of a writer’s room and make it to a screen.”

Advertisement

For better or worse, Josie dodges the Paradox by essentially embracing it. The characters themselves are cartoons, and there’s no effort at realism. Given that intent is a huge part of art, it seems unfair to call these characters “cartoons” as a criticism, and it should probably be a compliment. At the same time, they aren’t particularly memorable, which is not a great quality.

And—as a bonus—Tara Reid is perfectly cast as drummer Melody Valentine. Josie was a few years after her turn in Around the Fire (1998), an unintentionally hilarious classic that plays like a jam band afterschool special from the producers of Reefer Madness (look for this amazing film in an upcoming piece).
The acting in general is good, with Rachel Leigh Cook as Josie McCoy and Rosario Dawson as bassist Valerie Brown rounding out the band. And Alan Cumming almost steals the show as sleazy corporate weasel Wyatt Frame.

The character of Wyatt is the film’s funniest riff on a rock ‘n’ roll archetype: the sleazy, corporate manager accompanied by assorted crooked accountants. From Colonel Tom Parker to Albert Grossman to The Great Rock ‘n’ Roll Swindle. It’s all about the benjamins. Which is where the music comes in. If the music is good, that’s what makes it worth it. And Josie’s music has aged particularly well. It’s well-recorded, produced and executed. The songs are particularly catchy. The vocals are by Kay Hanley of Letters to Cleo. Much of the soundtrack sounds like a lost album from The Muffs, and one wonders why Kim Shattuck wasn’t involved.

There’s an argument that power pop was never supposed to be dangerous, and that the Muffs aren’t dangerous either. Fair on the surface, but they played real punk clubs and came from a real scene. There’s not even a hint of that in Josie. So an argument that they play pop punk (which they kinda do) is really lacking the punk part.
And it was produced by Babyface, of all people. While that doesn’t seem like it should lead to great rock ‘n’ roll, sometimes preconceptions are wrong.

That said, this is a very commercial product and sound—as catchy as it is—so maybe it’s not a misconception. Maybe the right question to ask is whether it’s all too perfect? And that’s what gives this ostensibly rock ‘n’ film a smoothed-down edge? After all, the basic ingredients are there. But part of what makes good rock good is that it feels actually dangerous. Maybe there are some actual subversive messages, or a genuine counterculture scene. And Josie simply isn’t that film. The soundtrack is fondly remembered enough that Hanley appeared live and performed the songs at a screening in 2017. That appearance also included the film’s stars Cook, Dawson and Reid.

Advertisement

It’s worth noting that while Cook and company obviously lip sync to the songs in the film, their performances are credible. They went through instrument boot camp, so they pull off the parts.

In the end, the film is primarily a satire of consumer culture. And even more strangely, is loaded with actual product placement. Clearly, the joke was intended to “hit harder” with real products, but having Target in the film constantly makes it feel like more of what it is parodying than a parody. Where’s the joke if the viewer actually pushes to shop at Target while watching the film? And if the filmmakers actually took money (which they almost certainly did)?

And perhaps that is the lesson for this month: a great rock ‘n’ roll movie needs to have something to say about the larger meaning or culture of the music. And while Josie may have a lot to say about culture in general, and it may say it in a fun and likeable way, it’s just not very rock ‘n’ roll. There’s no grit. Now, does it have some things to say about being in a band? Yes, though they are arguably true of most collaborations.

If someone in a hundred years wanted to understand early 21st century rock, Josie and the Pussycats is a bad choice. It doesn’t show the sweat of a performance or the smell of beer. But it’s a great choice for anyone looking for a light-hearted, fun watch with a great soundtrack. We could all use some sugar in our lives these days.
Join us again next month, when we’ll look at one of the inspirations for Josie, A Hard Day’s Night, the legendary first film from The Beatles

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Movie Reviews

Peaky Blinders: The Immortal Man review – Tommy Shelby returns for muddy, bloody big-screen showdown

Published

on

Peaky Blinders: The Immortal Man review – Tommy Shelby returns for muddy, bloody big-screen showdown

After six TV series from 2013 to 2022, which caused a worrying surge in flat cap-wearing among well-to-do men in country pubs, Peaky Blinders is now getting a hefty standalone feature film, a muscular picture swamped in mud and blood. This is the movie version of Steven Knight’s global small-screen hit, based on the real-life gangs that swaggered through Birmingham from Victorian times until well into the 20th century. Cillian Murphy returns with his uniquely unsettling, almost sightless stare as Tommy Shelby, family chieftain of a Romani-traveller gang, a man who has converted his trauma in the trenches of the first world war into a ruthless determination to survive and rule.

As we join the story some years after the curtain last came down, it is 1940, Britain’s darkest hour and Tommy is the crime-lion in winter. He now lives in a huge, remote mansion, far from the Birmingham crime scene he did so much to create, alone except for his henchman Johnny Dogs, played by Packy Lee. Evidently wearied and sickened by it all, Tommy is haunted by his ghosts and demons: memories of his late brother, Arthur, and dead daughter, Ruby, and working on what will be his definitive autobiography. (Sadly, we don’t get any scenes of Tommy having lunch with a drawling London publisher or agent.)

But a charismatic and beautiful woman, played by Rebecca Ferguson, brings Tommy news of what we already know: his malign idiot son Erasmus Shelby, played by Barry Keoghan, is now running the Peaky Blinders, a new gen-Z-style group of flatcappers raiding government armouries for guns that should really belong to the military. And if that wasn’t disloyal and unpatriotic enough, Erasmus has accepted a secret offer from a sinister Nazi fifth-columnist called Beckett, played by Tim Roth, to help distribute counterfeit currency which will destroy the economy and make Blighty easier to invade. Doesn’t Erasmus know what Adolf Hitler is going to do to his own Romani people? (To be fair to Erasmus, a lot of the poshest and most well-connected people in the land didn’t either.)

Clearly, Tommy is going to have to come down there and sort this mess out. And we get a very ripe scene in which soft-spoken Tommy turns up in the pub full of raucous idiots who cheek him. “Who the faaaaaack is ‘Tommy Shelby’?” sneers one lairy squaddie, who gets horribly schooled on that very subject.

Advertisement

In this movie, Tommy Shelby is against the Nazis, and he can’t get to be more of a good guy than that. (Tommy has evidently put behind him memories of Winston Churchill from the first two series, when Churchill was dead set on clamping down on the Peaky Blinders.) The war and the Nazis are a big theme for a big-screen treatment and screenwriter Knight and director Tom Harper put it across with some gusto as a kind of homefront war film, helped by their effortlessly watchable lead. Maybe you have to be fully invested in the TV show to really like it, although this canonisation of Tommy is a sentimental treatment of what we actually know of crime gangs in the second world war. Nevertheless, it is a resoundingly confident drama.

Peaky Blinders: The Immortal Man is in out on 6 March in the UK and US, and on Netflix from 20 March.

Continue Reading

Movie Reviews

Movie Review: Here comes “THE BRIDE!”, audacious and wild – Rue Morgue

Published

on

Movie Review: Here comes “THE BRIDE!”, audacious and wild – Rue Morgue

That’s both a promise and a challenge she delivers, since what follows may rub some viewers the wrong way. Yet Gyllenhaal’s full-throttle commitment to her vision is compelling in and of itself, and she has marshalled an absolutely smashing-looking and -sounding production. The story proper begins in 1936 Chicago, which, like everything and everyplace else in the movie, has been luminously shot by cinematographer Lawrence Sher and sumptuously conjured by production designer Karen Murphy. Her involvement is appropriate given that her previous credits include Bradley Cooper’s A STAR IS BORN and Baz Luhrmann’s ELVIS, since among other things, THE BRIDE! is a nostalgic musical. Its Frankenstein (Christian Bale), who has taken the name of his maker, is obsessed with big-screen tuners, and imagines himself in elaborate song-and-dance numbers. (Considering the reception to JOKER: FOLIE À DEUX, one must applaud the daring of Warner Bros. for greenlighting another expensive film in which a tormented protagonist has that kind of fantasy life.)

THE BRIDE! may be revisionist on many levels, but its characterization of its “monster” holds true to past screen incarnations from Karloff’s to Elordi’s: His scarred appearance masks a lonely soul who desires companionship. Frankenstein has arrived in Chicago to seek out Dr. Cornelia Euphronious (Annette Bening), correctly believing she has the scientific know-how to create an appropriate mate for him. Rather than piece one together, Dr. Euphronious resurrects the corpse of Ida (Jessie Buckley), whose consorting with underworld types led to her brutal death. Previously chafing against the man’s world she inhabited in life, she becomes even more defiant and unruly as a revenant, apparently possessed by the spirit of Shelley herself, declaiming in free-associative sentences and quoting rebellious literature.

Buckley, currently an Oscar favorite for her very different literary-inspired role in HAMNET, tears into the role of the Bride (who now goes by the name Penny) with invigorating abandon that bursts off the screen. Unsure of her identity yet overflowing with self-confident bravado, she’s the opposite of the sensitive “Frank,” but they’re united by the world that stands against them. That becomes literal when a violent incident sends them on the lam, road-tripping to New York City and beyond, on a trail inspired by the films of Ronnie Reed (Jake Gyllenhaal), Frank’s favorite song-and-dance-man star.

With THE BRIDE!, Gyllenhaal has made a film that’s at once her very own and a feverish homage to all sorts of cinema past and present. It’s a horror story, a lovers-on-the-run movie, a crime thriller, a musical and more, and historical fealty be damned if it makes for a good scene (as when Penny and Frank sneak into a 3D movie over a decade before such features became popular). In-references are everywhere: It might just be a coincidence that the couple’s travels take them past Fredonia, NY (cf. “Freedonia” in the Marx Brothers’ DUCK SOUP), but it’s certainly no accident that the former Ida is targeted by a crime boss named Lupino, referencing the actress and pioneering filmmaker whose works included noirs and women’s-issues stories. Penny’s exploits lead legions of admiring women to adopt her look and anarchic attitude, echoing the first JOKER (while a headline calls them “Twisted Sisters”), and the use of one Irving Berlin song in a Frankensteinian context immediately recalls a classic comedic take on the property.

Whether the audience should be put in mind of a spoof at a key point in a film with different goals is another matter. At times like these, Gyllenhaal’s pastiche ambitions overtake emotional investment in the story. As strong as the two lead performances are (Bale is quite moving, conveying a great deal of soul from behind his extensive prosthetics), it’s easier to feel for them in individual scenes than during the entire course of the just-over-two-hour running time. The diversions can be entertaining, to be sure, but they also result in an uncertainty of tone. The dissonance continues straight through to the end, where the filmmaker’s choice of closing-credits song once again suggests we’re not supposed to take all this too seriously.

Advertisement

There’s nonetheless much to admire and enjoy about THE BRIDE!, and this kind of risk-taking by a major studio is always to be encouraged (especially considering that we’ll see how long that lasts at Warner Bros. once Paramount takes it over). Beyond the terrific work by the aforementioned actors, there’s fine support from Peter Sarsgaard and Penelope Cruz as detectives on Penny and Frank’s heels, with Sandy Powell’s lavish costumes and Hildur Guðnadóttir’s rich, varied score vital to fashioning this fully imagined world. Kudos also to makeup and prosthetics designer Nadia Stacey and to Chris Gallaher and Scott Stoddard, who did those honors on Frank, for their visceral, evocative work. Uneven as it may be, THE BRIDE! is also as alive! as any film you’ll likely see this year.

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending