Summer movie heck

Well as usual, I haven’t been getting out much to see movies lately. Weekend free time is practically an oxymoron anymore.

But I did catch a couple of good ones this weekend, and I wanted to help. So I’m filing the following brief reports:

“G. I. Joe, Rise of Some Such Foolishness” was a terrific little actioner with some cool stunts I hadn’t seen before.

Most importantly, for a movie with its toy (or theme-park ride) –based pedigree, it didn’t drag its action sequences out till they got mind-numbing.

I guarantee you, Michael Bay could have made this film, shot for shot, and the run-time would have been 30 minutes longer. This movie picked up its story on the bounce and headed straight down the field. I didn’t even think of looking at my watch till it was over.

It reminded me of the way James Bond movies used to be. I just saw either “Goldfinger” or “Thunderball” (I forget which, it was one with the cool under-the-desert bad guys’ lair) and this film had that same giddy vibe. There was a time when only James Bond films offered the kind of super-spy action adventure that is so common now; big action “beat” every ten minutes or your summer movie doesn’t get made.

I should add that I didn’t know anything about the characters or the toys or the comic book mythos, so I went in a blank slate. If the franchise is beloved to you, I’m sure there is stuff to hate in this adaptation. (There always is...) But if you just want to go see Dennis Quaid (and Mr. Eko, from ‘Lost!’) embarrass themselves in a theme-park ride of a film for a fast-moving couple of hours, this flick is for you.

The other movie I saw was the new Tarantino flick, “Inglourious Basterds,” which also kicked happy ass.

I loved it. Brad Pitt’s character is like Karl from “Sling Blade’’s smarter brother. When he is called upon to showcase the Italian accent his character is so proud of, it’s falling-down hilarious.

Like all of Tarantino’s films (except arguably “Jackie Brown” which I have no idea what that was), this is a genre film. He’s finally worked his way around to WWII films, but this isn’t so much a film about WWII (like, say, “Saving Private Ryan” or “Band of Brothers” was) as a Quentin Tarantino reflection on WWII films. So it’s no surprise one of his main characters is a film buff and filmmaker. If he hadn’t made the character a woman it would have been an even more transparent ploy to put himself into the thick of the action. (By the way, I’d like to thank the director for the restraint he demonstrated in not taking a role in front of the camera for a change.)

There are a number of dialogue set-pieces, definitely a Tarantino specialty. I can’t think of another filmmaker working today who uses language the way he does. He builds dialogue scenes the same way Sam Peckinpah built action sequences. There’s so much stuff going on at so many different levels. There’s a bar scene in this one that stands up to the best exchanges from “Pulp Fiction” or “Reservoir Dogs.”

Also excellent use of violence. Over-the-top at times (you’ll know it when you see it), but that’s just part of what makes a Tarantino film a Tarantino film. He’s got all the toys in the toybox at his disposal and he’s going to use every one! Plus it’s a WWII film; you know going in that there will be blood spilled.

Great villain, great climax, strong women’s roles if that’s important to you (and if it is you’ll be outraged at the lack of racial diversity in the cast!). I’ve been waiting to see this one since it was just an internet rumor and it still didn’t disappoint.

Shit, I’m feeling lucky. 2 for 2? I may even give “District 9” a chance next weekend.