Review: The Disaster Artist

Written by Scott Neustadter and Michael H. Weber and directed by James Franco, “The Disaster Artist” is the true story of the making of the now infamous cult classic/midnight movie extraordinaire, “The Room”. At the center of this hurricane of a film production is the friendship between Tommy Wiseau (James Franco) and Greg Sestero (Dave Franco). The film begins with Greg taking an acting class in San Francisco where he timidly makes an attempt at the scene he’s been given before quietly sitting back down. Immediately after that the acting teacher asks if anyone else would like to make an attempt at the material. One lone voice responds to that call. Tommy Wiseau meanders down the stairs and proceeds to throw everything at his scene, quite literally. He grumbles and screeches, climbs the set structures to jump off and dramatically lay out on the floor- all while wailing without shame. This is Wiseau in a nutshell, confident and shameless-even when his instincts betray his intentions. Greg, meanwhile, is mesmerized by this display of fearlessness and seeks out Tommy after class to seek an attempt at capturing what Wiseau has in spades, confidence beyond measure and consideration. The long-haired and heavily accented force of nature accepts and after a scene in a diner where he pushes Greg to recite some lines loudly while ignoring the onlooking of everyone in the restaurant, they agree to go to Los Angeles to break into acting. These small moments are the foundation upon which the rest of the film rests, two weird nobodies sharing a dream and conspiring to beat the odds and secure that dream.


This movie could have easily been a joke where the audience laughs at the ridiculous nature and choices of Tommy Wiseau and crew (and admittedly we do), but the film makes a serious effort to never make Wiseau the butt of the joke in a malevolent or mean-spirited fashion. It’s more along the lines of the audience rooting for Wiseau and Sestero, but then laughing when they fail in spectacular fashion. There’s an admirable stab at infusing humanity into the mysterious Wiseau so that we don’t feel as though we’re kicking him when he’s down. Instead the laughter is complimented by a hand offering assistance and encouragement at another go at it.


After living and striving in Los Angeles for several months with next to nothing to show for their acting efforts, Sestero and Wiseau ultimately decide to try and make their own film instead. With Tommy’s seemingly endless funds and ambition the two scrape together a production crew, and cast the film with much bluster and blundering involved. If you know anything about the basics of filmmaking you’ll find a lot to laugh about. For example, Tommy and Greg go to a film rental shop to get some gear and instead of renting the expensive cameras, lenses, and filmstock, Wiseau opts to simply buy it all, both the film and the video cameras- everything. The budget details for “The Room” must have been staggering and quite amusing. Like choosing to build an alleyway set that looks exactly like the one just outside the studio, or the questionable choice to green-screen the Los Angeles skyline- of which they also have access to. That’s just the tip of the myriad of oddball and expensive creative choices that led to the creation of this very specific movie.


“The Disaster Artist” is an oddball of entertainment. The Franco brothers did a lot to portray the two midnight movie makers with heart and ambition, and that’s why the film succeeds at the end of the day. Sure, the weirdly acute creative decisions of “The Room” provide hearty laughter with it’s most infamous scenes recreated, “YOU’RE TEARING ME APART LISA!” and “Oh Hai Mark” among many others, but with the grounded focus on friendship and creative ambition against all odds (and then some), “The Disaster Artist” repurposes that same love for the cinema that got so many people involved in filmmaking to begin with. Perhaps the strangest product to come from Hollywood in years, this film was a joy to watch, and laugh with.


Final Score: 158 takes of “Oh Hai Mark”

*Oh and for a more in depth look into the horde of celebrity and comedian cameos in the film, check this out:

P.S. The next pairing of these two titans of B-movie mania is actually right around the corner. “Best F(r)iends”, written by Sestero and starring both Wiseau and Sestero, has been described as ‘like a Hitchcock noir- but with Tommy Wiseau‘ So that should be quite the unique piece. I say check it out, (I actually will be seeing this one) you probably won’t see anything like it- their track record indicates as much.

P.P.S. It’s also being released in two volumes, a la “Kill Bill”, Vol. 1 will play in 600 select theaters nationwide on March 30 and April 2, followed by Vol. 2 on June 1 and June 4.


Review: Tomb Raider (2018)

Written by Geneva Robertson-Dworet and Alastair Siddons and directed by Roar Uthaug, “Tomb Raider” is the third film adaption of the popular video game series of the same name- whilst also being a reboot that in itself is an adaption of the series’ most recent reboot to the video game series that was released in 2013 (whew, that was a lot). Alicia Vikander stars as Lara Croft this time around in a much more grounded take on the action adventure series than the prior Angelina Jolie films (which, I have to say are quite a lot of fun in their own right). In this origin of the character Lara’s father, Lord Richard Croft (Dominic West), became obsessed with ancient myths and artifacts after the death of her mother and had absconded off to a mysterious island in the pacific near Japan seven years prior to search for the tomb of Himiko, the cursed first empress of Japan. Myth and legend shrouded her legacy, but all cite a supposed apocalyptic scenario that would be unleashed upon the world if her tomb were to be disturbed. Lord Croft had pursued the legend with The Trinity at his coattails, an evil organization looking to weaponize the myth. He sought to keep the tomb hidden and out of the hands of the Syndicate… err, the Nazis… I mean… Trinity– yes them, that’s the one.


When we meet Lara in the first act she’s living in London on a shoestring budget, refusing to accept her father’s inheritance- signing that contract would be accepting his death. Instead she makes ends meet by training at a small gym and cycling through the crowded streets as a courier. Right off the bat the film sets the mood firmly in the momentum and thrill of Lara’s life. After overhearing the details of a lucrative courier race, in which a paint can is strapped to her bike leaking paint with a fox tail attached and only given a moments head start, she’s accepted the challenge and races through London closely followed by a league of cyclists. This scene was cleverly shot and a fun way to kickstart the film’s energetic sense of fun. Which is one of the film’s best attributes overall.


Once Lara makes her way to the Croft building to begrudgingly accept her inheritance, she’s given a puzzling cryptex that she solves as she’s being read the specifics of her father’s will, as if she were simply fidgeting. As she does so, a key pops out with a clue that leads her to her father’s own tomb- where she discovers the details of his globe-trotting adventures. She’s quickly off to follow his trail and discover the path he took to his death. She ends up in China before long to question the captain that chartered her father to the remote island. Instead she finds Lu Ren (Daniel Wu) the son of the captain she sought. After some squabbling she offers him a payday worth his while and they set sail, so to speak, for the island dead set in the middle of the devil’s sea.


Once she’s stepped upon the island she meets the villain of the film, Mathias Vogel, an employee of the shapeless Trinity organization played with serviceable cruelty by Walton Goggins. From there the film goes about the usual tropes of any action adventure movie or video game, i.e. solving puzzles, sneaking past unnamed and heinous henchmen, encountering dizzying thrills, all in service of seeking the eponymous tomb. So that’s all well and good, but is the film successful in its execution of these well-worn adventure themed devices? I would say that it does. While this film never reaches the heights of Indiana Jones, it does enough to separate itself as a story all it’s own while maintaining a solid sense of momentum and adequate adventure thrills. Alicia Vikander was an excellent casting choice for this reboot, while the script never reaches for the wise-cracking snark and personality of her video game peer in Nathan Drake, she does a lot with what she’s given. You can feel her struggle and her purpose in seeking answers to her father’s mysterious end.


This latest version of “Tomb Raider” gives a lot of potential for a solid string of sequels if the studio so chooses. There could be some polish done in the future, maybe learn what didn’t exactly work in this entry for example, and this could very well turn into quite an enjoyable series. Though the last five minutes of the film do go a bit over the top in their obvious hopes for another shot at the material. While the film lacks some magic in the writing and the plot points feel a bit familiar, it’s still good fun at the theater!



Final Score: three puzzles, one island, and a good deal of fun


Review: DeathWish (2018)

Written by Joe Carnahan and directed by Eli Roth, “Death Wish” is the 2018 remake of the Charles Bronson led 1974 crime/revenge movie. It’s also a heaping pile of poorly timed garbage. Have you ever seen a revenge movie? Generally speaking, the hero usually loses his family or loved ones-or is simply wronged in some form, and he then pursues vigilante justice after the legal system fails him. That’s this whole movie. Which, I could forgive if the film was either, A) comically over-the-top with it’s violence and tone, B) had something important to say- at all, or C) if the film wasn’t as rote, banal, and as bland as it turned out to be.


To be fair, going into this showing I had zero expectations. In fact the whole point of going to see this film with friends was to ‘go see a bad movie’ together. Whew, well by that metric, the film was a success. Which is a shame in all honesty, Bruce Willis used to be a Movie Star-with a capital M! Now he’s relegated to shoehorned and forced ‘action titles’ that rank among this film’s quality. The last ‘Die Hard’ was a travesty and the man’s been sleeping-walking through bad films ever since. The only hope I had going into this film was that Eli Roth, as a well known horror director, could bring a sort of tongue in cheek levity to the film’s untimely subject matter and make it comedically palatable. I was quite wrong with that hope.


If it had been tackled with any sort of imagination instead of the tired ‘been there, done that!’ filmmaking tactics that gave way to this film, there could have been something worthwhile there. In my opinion the most significant problem with the film was it’s lack of confidence. It felt as if there was a tug-of-war between wanting to craft a shoot ’em up gore fest grindhouse flick, and a serious gritty crime film with a glaze of nostalgia for those left wanting after the finale of ‘Breaking Bad’. Speaking of which, Dean Norris and Vincent D’Onofrio both make attempts within the margins of this script to elevate the films status- even if only for a moment- but they too fail in this effort. The material is weak, the direction was left wanting, the script was mind numbing, and Bruce Willis was dead-eyed from the opening scenes to the credits roll. Trust me, you can skip this one. In fact, if you’re looking for some so bad it’s good content I’ll leave a link below to an episode of ‘Best of the Worst’ from Red Letter Media on YouTube. In this particular episode they discuss the third ‘Death Wish’ with Charles Bronson, among other equally bad movies, which is far more entertaining than the current remake in theaters.

Final Score: 1 Wish… FOR DEATH(!)


Review: Annihilation

Written and directed by Alex Garland, “Annihilation” is his second directorial feature after the hit “Ex-Machina” released a few years back.  This film, while maintaining an evolving yet clear style, is one of those rare movies that sticks with you-it buries itself inside your mind to stay with you after the credits have ended and you’ve driven home. This movie is everything I want from straight sci-fi films-no fantasy here (Which is fine, I enjoy ‘Guardians of the Galaxy’ and ‘Star Wars’ too), this is simply a different kind of science fiction. It’s a film that, in my experience, grows on you with time. So, the plot of the film is that Natalie Portman’s character, Lena, is a biologist professor who has lost her husband (Oscar Isaac), a soldier who perished on his last mission. She teaches her classes solemnly in her grief before an event occurs that gets her sent to Area X, an observatory stationed just outside a mysterious phenomena nicknamed “The Shimmer”. Her dead husband was part of the last mission sent into ‘the shimmer’, nobody ever sent in has returned. At the observatory she is met by other experts preparing for a crucial final mission into ‘the shimmer’, the only scientific group so far- all other efforts had been military minded. All four members Cass Sheppard (Tuva Novotny), Anya Thorensen (Gina Rodriguez), Josie Radek (Tessa Thompson), and Dr. Ventress (Jennifer Jason Leigh) each have their own personal reasons for joining a mission that is concerned by all others to be a death sentence. Finally Lena, an accredited biologist, decides to join the team, as her skills could be an asset to the potential research findings.


There are elements from the works of David Cronenberg, John Carpenter, H.P. Lovecraft, and Kubrick sprinkled throughout while never becoming homage or an ode to a specific style or anything other than itself. It reminds me of the greats of sci-fi without ever being subservient to what came before it. This film is somewhat difficult to discuss or review without giving up all of the secrets that the film has to give, so in the interest of piquing your interests reader, but without giving you all of the details, I implore you to give this film a chance. So, in order to facilitate a sense of the film so that you can better decide whether this is something you would enjoy or not, I’ll vaguely describe what I found to be the aspects of the film that made me love it.


First, and most reviews of this film will note on this, the film has some beautiful imagery once the team is inside ‘the shimmer’. The production design and the practical effects that went into making the effects that ‘the shimmer’ would have on our planet are fascinating, the flora and fauna have been altered by these effects in brilliant colors and mutations on a cellular level. The sound design, and choice of music paired with soundtrack, is crisp and tactile, warm and familiar, but cold and strange in other ways. A pairing of folksy acoustic guitar with moody and bellowing synth seems like it shouldn’t work, but the way the film incorporates these two distinct sounds and tones throughout the runtime works to great effect. The characters are also a real treat, none of them make illogical or unsound decisions, they are smart characters that seem like the experts they claim to be. No character turns out to be a dumb foil for another and they all make as much sense of the mystery they’re wading into as best they can. Let it be said though that while this film is slow and fairly brooding, concerned more with asking thoughtful questions than crafting horror movie antics to get butts into seats- it does have scenes of truly creepy imagery and horrifying brutality.


I feel as though revealing more would only be a detriment to those who might go and check this film out. Which I highly suggest doing. Smart sci-fi films like this are a rarity and if you enjoy such films, vote with your money. That’s the only way to encourage more risk taking from our cinematic storytellers. I say, go out there, make it weirder, make the story that drives you and fascinates you! Or at the very least, go watch a film that challenges you.

Final Score: 5 scientific explorers, 1 shimmer


Old School Review: Breathless (1960)

Written by François Truffaut and directed by Jean-Luc Godard, “Breathless” is a classic French crime film that helped to form the New Wave style of films coming from French filmmakers at that time. The story centers on Michel Poiccard, (Jean-Paul Belmondo) a petty thief in Paris who frequently steals cars for joyrides and pickpockets cash from unsuspecting pedestrians. He reunites with an American girl, Patricia Franchini (Jean Seberg), who’s studying to become a journalist after he impulsively murders a police officer on one of his more casual grand theft autos in the countryside just outside of Paris. Most of the film is spent following these two in the streets of Paris, in cafes and hotels, almost always smoking while they discuss many aspects of life with whimsy through their opinions and fluttery definitions about everything from the opposite sexes to how one should drive while behind the wheel.


Now, admittedly, I wasn’t a gigantic fan of this film after giving it a watch, but I had to know what made it so renowned and gilded among cinephiles. Given the year the film was made I was surprised at the speed and abrupt use of jump-cuts in the film’s editing. However that didn’t seem enough to make it supposedly legendary, so I did some reading on the movie. The late 1950’s and early 1960’s in France were a rebellious era of filmmaking characterized by a coup of sorts against the established narrative form in French cinema. These new French filmmakers broke away from any sense of a studio system and shot their independent features on shoestring budgets, often without permission on locations, and usually focusing on characters that weren’t natural protagonists by the standard definitions. As for “Breathless” itself, filming took place anywhere between 15 minutes to 12 hours depending on what Godard had come up with that day. They filmed in Paris in stores and cafes mostly without being granted access in order to secure the spontaneous feel in the film that Godard was going for. There was a considerable amount of improvisation and Godard reportedly kept his journal of dialogue close and only shared what he believed to be necessary.


In today’s world, the film may not seem all that special, but it did a lot to give independent filmmakers an origin, somebody had to be the first to get their shots without the permission from the gatekeepers, right? Indie film cred aside, the film may harbor some resentment from modern audiences for its characters’ opinions. I suspect that many American audiences today could be triggered by the subjects that the characters discuss and how they go about discussing them. To be fair, the perspective is from an entirely different culture and from a generation and a half ago. As we’re still very much embroiled in the #MeToo movement here in America, everything is still tender. Simply talking about sexuality and the roles of women and men in life and the workplace can be a careful tap-dance of attempting to recognize and listen to every person’s point of view, let alone expressing the viewpoints that this film does. The French culture approaches these topics in a fairly different manner, but especially so in the 1960’s, in a post war Paris, and given that the New Wave movement was focused on morally ambiguous characters to stand aside from the greater film structures of the time- so there’s a lot to dissect given all of the variables in play.


The film does have it’s place in celluloid history, but I wouldn’t say that its the most entertaining film out there. Which is fine, not every story works for every audience. I’d have to see more from the New Wave directors before making a final opinion on the select era and group of filmmakers’ work, but the making of this film was more interesting to me than the final product. Surprised by the international praise of the film, Jean-Luc Godard doesn’t regret making the film because they defied the power structures of the filmmaking process and he was glad that they had thrown all that aside and opened the process up. In the end, I’m glad I gave it a watch, another film can be checked off my list and my perspective widens because of it.

Final Score: 100 cigarettes and 50 cups of coffee


Review: Black Panther

Written by Joe Robert Cole and Ryan Coogler and directed by Coogler, “Black Panther” is the 18th movie in Marvel Studios’ sprawling universe of superheroics and T’Challa (Chadwick Boseman) takes center stage as the titular Black Panther whilst being surrounded by an impeccable cast. This weekend marks a significant debut for representation not only in the Marvel Studios Universe, but for superhero films in general. We’ve had previous superhero movies starring African American leads like Wesley Snipes in “Blade” and its two sequels. There was also “Steel” starring Shaq, “Hancock” starring Will Smith, and the oft derided “Catwoman” starring Halle Berry amongst a few others. This is a different film though, one that doesn’t tiptoe around various injustices, but rather it makes those questions of morality and the adverse effects of colonialism the beating heart of conflict in the film. This film also doesn’t just recognize Africa, the film took great efforts to ingrain the fictional country of Wakanda into the real world setting of Northeastern Africa.


Which brings me to what I believe is the greatest asset of the film, the incredibly effective world building that went into realizing Wakanda. The filmmakers’ crafted Wakanda as a place that felt as if it had existed untouched and unfiltered by time, hidden by superior technology granted by a chance vibranium meteorite crashing into Wakanda ages ago. Sprawling cityscapes depict a fascinating version of Afrofuturism unleashed in the bustling merchants district alongside the wide and open plains under the watchful eye of W’Kabi (Daniel Kaluuya) and the border tribe, there’s even a mountainous wintry region ruled by the Jabari tribe who are staunchly against the rule of T’Challa, chief among them being their leader M’Baku (Winston Duke). Along with the River tribes and the vast and intricate mining facilities, Wakanda feels like an interconnected country with a long history and that’s a feat that the filmmakers should be praised for accomplishing so efficiently.


Another way that “Black Panther” stands out from the crowd is in its sense of community. There’s a balance between tradition and futurism that affects all those who live in Wakanda, but especially for those who lead among the isolationist nation. It is here between the pendulum of modernity and tradition that T’Challa has his conflicts within the film, but it has a rippling effect on all of the characters in some form. Okoye (Danai Gurira) the general of the royal guard, the Dora Milaje, and Shuri (Letitia Wright), T’Challa’s brilliant younger sister and head of the technological prowess of Wakanda, both perfectly exemplify this bridge between conflicting ideologies. Okoye is bound to a strict interpretation of tradition within the Dora Milaje-even after unspeakable acts (I’ll try to keep spoilers at bay) have taken place, she must fufill her duties to the throne. Whereas Shuri is bound to the future inherent in Wakanda’s tech, she is always looking to the next update or upgrade. Though Lupita Nyong’o’s  Nakia may be more of a divergent spirit in this sense. Nakia’s background in espionage and her former relationship with T’Challa provide her with a character that’s willing to break from tradition when its logical to do so. It is this divide that drove T’Chaka’s, (John Kani) brother N’Jobu (Sterling K. Brown) towards his revolutionary tendencies and the crux of the film’s conflict; should Wakanda open itself up to world and aid those worse off with their great technological feats? Or should they stay unconquered and safely hidden from the world? The film deftly handles the question of how the previous generations handled the world, in all it’s beauty and tragedy, and whether or not they were right by their actions.. or damned by them? Michael B. Jordan’s Killmonger is the literal formation of these past demons come to haunt T’Challa, the new King and Black Panther of Wakanda.



Perhaps the single greatest part of this film is its villain in Eric Killmonger. Motivated by the death of his father as a child and abandoned in America, Killmonger pursued his interests with a lethal tenacity and never let a soul intercept his goal of invading Wakanda. Like his father before him Killmonger is a violent revolutionary in the spirit of Magneto, seeking to liberate those who were besieged by history’s injustices. Michael B. Jordan excelled in crafting an adversary whose intentions never wavered, and more importantly, he made Killmonger a layered individual with purpose behind his eyes. His goals, while extreme, can be understood. However since he’s a violent and careless individual we naturally side with T’Challa’s approach, but Eric’s a tragic character whose anger comes from a very real place.


I have to say that I quite enjoyed the film overall. The film is the first since “Doctor Strange” in the MCU to have so few connections to the wider MCU canon and that’s a benefit to this story. There was no need for a Stark reference or even a Captain America cameo for this film to work within the structures of the MCU, it had enough to juggle without needless and contrived studio mandated team ups (though I do love it when it works well in other movies!). As for the two white guys in the movie, I really enjoyed Andy Serkis getting to work without being covered from head to toe in digital garb or practical effects and make-up, his Ulysses Klaue (sounds like Klaw) was a scene chewing performance well worth the time spent with him. The other melanin deficient character was Martin Freeman’s C.I.A. agent Everett Ross revived from his “Civil War” role and plopped into this film without feeling misplaced or ill advised. The film as a whole was a great time at the theater and I look forward to seeing how these events change the MCU from here out!

Final Score: 1 Prince and 1 Pauper (Seriously, just go see it- you don’t need my arbitrary and baseless scores to know whether or not you’re interested in this film)


Review: Brawl in Cell Block 99

Written and directed by S. Craig Zahler, “Brawl in Cell Block 99” is a film in which Vince Vaughn stars as Bradley, an auto mechanic with a streak of bad luck that ends him up in prison. After being fired from his job and coming home to find out that his wife (Jennifer Carpenter) was engaged in an affair Bradley takes stock of his life and decides to work for an old friend running drugs, just until they can afford a better life to start again. Fast forward eighteen months and his scheme worked, he has a strict system about his drug running and his efficiency has afforded the married couple a decent house along with a pregnancy that drives Bradley throughout the rest of the film.


However, since the title of the film is “Brawl in Cell Block 99” we know that the film has to take a downward turn, and it is quite the spiral of increasingly awful situations. It begins with Gil (Marc Blucas), Bradley’s drug running boss and friend, setting up a new business deal with a group of Mexican gangsters equally invested in the drug game. Bradley quickly assesses the men he is to work with on the next run and declines to work with one that he suspects is using, but Gil pulls him aside noting that the deal needs to go through for financial reasons and sweetens the deal for Bradley with a three month leave once his daughter is born. As you might expect, the deal goes awry when the runner that Bradley had pointed out earlier refuses to drop the drugs to be picked up later when the police arrive and a shootout blazes between them and the two henchmen from the Mexican gang.


Bradley intervenes and gets sent straight to prison for a seven year sentence. Once inside he’s met by a representative of the Mexican Cartel (though admittedly I’m not sure if they were meant to be representative of the Cartel specifically) who informs him of the massive net loss that his boss took because of the botched drug deal. He expects Bradley to set this straight by killing a marked target of the Cartel who’s locked away in the maximum security facility of Redleaf, in cell block 99. If he doesn’t kill the target, the associates of the Cartel leader, who had already kidnapped Bradley’s wife, will sever the limbs of his unborn child in such a way that the child will still live through the birthing process. Thus Bradley must become infamous enough to get placed in Redleaf, and then he must become even more deadly to work his way into Cell Block 99 to save his family.


Which brings me to the violence of the film. This film is cruel and it is brutal in its depictions of arm snapping and skull bashing grindhouse prison fighting genre action. I’d seen Zahler’s last film “Bone Tomahawk” a western horror film in which Kurt Russell, Richard Jenkins, and Patrick Wilson are settlers besieged by a crude sect of Native Americans that brutalize those they take captive. I personally wasn’t a fan of that film, even though it had it’s merits in performances and cinematography. The senselessness and depressing void of morality that encompassed the film, especially its ending, wasn’t something I enjoyed. This film however, changes the tone in its ultimate notions of justice and victory. I won’t spoil anything regarding the final act, but it’s a much more satisfying film overall for me personally. You can definitely tell that this film is from the same filmmaker that gave us “Bone Tomahawk” though. Both films are quiet in nature until they burst with unchallenged sounds, startling the auditory senses. This story also puts our lead through many hurdles and hoops of suffering. As a former boxer in his youth Bradley came slightly more prepared to his round of unjust brutality than the settlers of “Bone Tomahawk” were for their suffering to come.


This film is an entertaining piece of genre fair, though not all will enjoy it. It’s not incredibly high on my list of favorites from 2017, but it was a unique offering for sure. Vince Vaughn effectively shows us a man backed up against a wall, fighting for his family’s freedom any way he can. Even if that means becoming a person that he doesn’t see himself as. There’s also a fun scenery chewing performance by Don Johnson as the final warden that Bradley faces. If you’re okay with extremely brutal violence and the grindhouse style of films, then you might enjoy this. If anything else it’s just another way to pass the time this winter.

Final Score: 2 snapped arms & a couple bashed-in skulls