Invasion U.S.A.: Joseph Zito

No no...no no no no no! This shouldn't be possible! A movie where Chuck Norris fights off a Soviet invasion of terrorists armed with rocket launchers, automatic weapons, and quips should not be so boring! But apparently the people behind Joseph Zito's Invasion U.S.A. thought that watching Norris walk really slowly while speaking in a barely audible whispered monotone was intense and exciting. What began as an enjoyable silly and improbable popcorn flick devolved into a boring, lifeless slog. Some of the special effects work was admirable and impressive, particularly the scene where the terrorists blew up a residential neighborhood block and raided a shopping mall. Of course, these scenes were aided by the fact that the destroyed properties had been scheduled for demolition so Zito and his effects team were literally allowed to do just about anything they wanted to do to the buildings. But still...this movie was unforgivably dull.

4/10

Delta Force 2: The Colombian Connection: Aaron Norris

Now this is more like it! While the first Delta Force film was burdened with extreme tonal inconsistency, switching between sincere drama and Chuck Norris actionsploitation at a moment's notice, this sequel, Delta Force 2: The Colombian Connection, has no confusion about what kind of a movie it is. Quite simply, it is a pure-bred Chuck Norris extravaganza. After several DEA agents and his partner, Major Bobby Chavez, are brutally murdered by the sadistic Colombian drug lord Roman Cota, Colonel Scott McCoy (Norris) attempts to infiltrate his mansion, rescue a number of hostages, and bring Cota back alive. Norris' usual stoicism helps elevate McCoy from being just another 80s action beefcake to a legitimate character. If there actually was a special ops soldier capable of doing what McCoy does in this film, we can easily believe that he would act in a similar manner. The other high point of the film is the performance by Billy Drago as Cota. Even among other dickish 80s action villians, Cota ranks as one of the most twisted and evil. This is a man who personally executes Chavez's family (and pregnant wife) just for the hell of it after being released on bail from the police. This is a man who kills the husband and infant child of one of his slaves before raping her after she is unable to continue harvesting drugs. This is a man who sees unnecessary cruelty as its own reward. He doesn't just kill Chavez, he gasses him to death in a room with a plexiglass window so he can enjoy watching him die. Yes, his unusually grotesque antics are emotionally manipulative, but they are nevertheless effective. Not only is it a fun movie, but it is one of Norris' best.

7/10

The Delta Force: Menahem Golan

Menahem Golan's The Delta Force is quite an odd duck. Most of it is a gripping, emotionally exhausting retelling of the real-life hijacking of TWA Flight 847 in 1985. But it is also an action movie starring Chuck Norris and Lee Marvin about the U.S. Army Delta Force tasked with rescuing the hostages. To be fair, Golan manages both narratives individually quite well. The segments about the hijacking are tense, thrilling, and captivating. Scenes where the Islamic hijackers separate the Jewish passengers are a bit emotionally manipulative, however. But considering the fact that Golan is a native Israelite who fought in the Israeli War of Independence, these creative choices are somewhat understandable. The action scenes with Norris and Marvin are excellent and cheesy, as well. But here's the film's biggest problem: the two narratives don't blend. Clearly the hijacking scenes are meant to be taken seriously. But the action scenes are deliriously over-the-top in that special 80s Golan-Globus manner. Imagine if Schindler's List (1993) periodically cut to footage from Inglourious Basterds (2009). That's not to say that the film isn't entertaining or worth watching. But viewers should be warned that they are about to witness a disjointed, uneven film.

6/10

Missing in Action 3: Aaron Norris

Third verse, same as the first. Aaron Norris' Missing in Action 3 continues the story of the most tragically beleaguered American serviceman in history: Colonel James Braddock (Chuck Norris). In the first movie, he had to break into Vietnam to rescue American POWs. In the second, he had to break out of Vietnam. Now, in this third movie, he has to do both. First, he has to break into Vietnam to rescue his wife (who he thought was killed during the Fall of Saigon) and his son (that he never knew he had). Unsurprisingly, after learning that Braddock, the inexplicably invincible and unstoppable killing machine responsible for humiliating their military and government twice, the North Vietnamese capture him, kill his wife, and torture his son. So, of course, he now has to break out of Vietnam along with the Reverend who operated the Mission that took care of Braddock's family and the dozens of other orphans under his care. So, yeah, there really isn't anything that new or groundbreaking in this film. Once again, Chuck Norris doesn't really act. Instead, he just sorta keeps his mouth shut so he can stare stoically and dramatically at the people around him. That worked in Missing in Action 2: The Beginning (1985) because for almost the entire movie he was a POW and had to project an aura of confidence and strength to keep his men motivated. But in this film, the stoicism wears thin, particularly during the scene where he first reunites with his long-lost wife and child. Instead of acting like, you know, a human being, Norris delivers his lines like an automaton. I will give this film credit where credit is due: I did like the opening with the Fall of Saigon. It did a fantastic job depicting the chaos and terror of an entire city self-imploding. Otherwise, this film is largely forgettable.

5/10

Missing in Action 2: The Beginning: Lance Hool

Lance Hool's Missing in Action 2: The Beginning really got to me. It bothered and disturbed me on a deeper level than films like I Spit on Your Grave (1978) and Cannibal Holocaust (1980). Why? Because...well...a lot of what is depicted in this film may have actually happened. Let me explain: the film is about a group of American POWs in North Vietnam. Their leader, Colonel James Braddock (Chuck Norris) is being blackmailed by the camp's commanding officer, Colonel Yin, into confessing to a list of phoney war crimes. To try and make him "confess," Colonel Yin resorts to a series of unspeakable tortures, both physical and psychological, to break Braddock and his men. These tortures take up the majority of the movie. Imagine if the Russian Roulette scene from The Deerhunter (1978) was stretched into a feature length film. This being a Golan/Globus production, we know that eventually Chuck Norris will break out, kill Yin, and save everyone. But the film takes such sadistic pleasure in watching him torment the POWs that it's essentially a rape/revenge film by way of the Vietnam war genre. And, yes, the Vietnamese characters are almost all presented as being completely bereft of redeeming qualities. But here's the kicker: I did some research on how real-life American POWs were treated in North Vietnam and discovered that Missing in Action 2 didn't exaggerate too much (at least for an 80s action film). Is a film like this jingoistic if such things really happened? Nobody seems to think that it's racist to depict Nazis as German. If this were a more "serious" movie by someone like Oliver Stone, would it be considered a masterpiece? Missing in Action 2 certainly left more of an emotional impact than any other film I've seen recently. Is the fact that it's a Golan/Globus Chuck Norris vehicle keeping it from getting the attention that it deserves? I don't know. But I do know that forgetting about this film is an impossibility.

6/10

Missing in Action: Joseph Zito

I didn't know it was possible that you could water down a movie like George P. Cosmatos' Rambo: First Blood Part II (1985). But Joseph Zito's Missing in Action proved me wrong. Apparently based on the story treatment that would eventually become the aforementioned Rambo sequel, Missing in Action follows an American ex-POW who goes back into Vietnam after the conclusion of the war to rescue fellow POWs. In Rambo: First Blood Part II, the American officer was played by Sylvester Stallone, an actor who could bring a sense of authenticity to even the most overblown and over-the-top material ("Do we get to win this time?"). In Missing in Action, the American officer is played by Chuck Norris, a man who, while extremely skilled at martial arts, is only a mediocre actor. To be honest, his character, Colonel James Braddock, is rather bland despite being inexplicably invincible to bullets. Early scenes where he is forced to interact with an evil North Vietnamese general played by James Hong are satisfyingly effective. Hong knows how to play a good villain, a fact which reflects both on his talents as an actor and on Hollywood's shameful reliance on him for "evil Chinamen" stereotypes. But the film delivers exactly what it advertises: patriotic chest-thumping, gigantic explosions, and, of course, Chuck Norris.

5/10

An Eye for an Eye: Steve Carver

Even going by early 80s revenge film standards, Steve Carver's An Eye for an Eye has a brutal first act. After seeing his partner brutally gunned down in an ambush, undercover San Francisco narcotics cop Sean Kane (Chuck Norris) overhears his reporter friend Linda Chan get murdered over the telephone. Apparently, Linda managed to get damning evidence against the drug gang responsible for the ambush. In the wake of so much tragedy, Kane teams up with Linda's father, James Chan (Mako Iwamatsu) to bring justice against those responsible. This being a Chuck Norris film, James is also Kane's martial arts teacher. But much to my surprise, Kane isn't a very competent martial artist. He is clumsy and unrefined. I know that this doesn't denote a lack of skill on Chuck Norris' part. After all, this film was made nine years after he starred opposite of Bruce Lee in Way of the Dragon (1972). Making Kane a sub-par martial artist was an interesting character choice. The film also contained a decent twist where the man that we thought was the villain turned out to be a hero and the cooperative, concerned ally turns out to be the main antagonist. At least, that latter twist would have been surprising if he hadn't been played by Christopher Lee. But I applaud the filmmaker's effort in trying to make it work.

6/10