Wedlock

I love Rutger Hauer. He is a cool and funny actor that isn't afraid to get his hands wet and try anything out of the ordinary.

Wedlock isn't one of his stranger ones, but it is definitely one of his best!

Set in the near future, Rutger joins Mimi Rodgers at a new top security prison that straps bombs to prisoners necks (much like Battle Royale) so they can't escape.

Each prisoner is 'wedlocked' to another so that if one blows, the other soon follows!

With Mimi by his side, Rutger and co-star go on an adventure that sends them in search of the object that got him imprisoned in the first place... $25 million worth of diamonds.

With the bad guys hot on the heels, things start to go a little 'Fletch' at times with some great action scenes, hilarious one liners and more.

The film is great entertainment and one I had wished I watched earlier!

DEADLOCK (1992 - MADE FOR CABLE TV) **1/2 Rutger Hauer, Mimi Rogers, Joan Chen, James Remar, Stephen Tobolosky.

Pretty good futuristic action/crime story with prisoners (Hauer and Rogers, make a fine couple) fitted with collars that can cause their heads to be blown off (a la Schwarzenegger's "The Running Man") as they pursue their double-partners in crime. Best scene : after days of solitude the greedy warden, wanting to know where Hauer has hidden some stolen loot, opens a door where Hauser - up to his neck in water - tells him: "North Pole...ask for Santa" and laughs maniacally.

Rutger Hauer's movies tend to be better than one would expect from genre pieces, often because of a special feel for atmosphere and quirk. Deadlock was one of the first movies to feature the newer, heavier Hauer, who uses his heft to the advantage of his characterization, creating a slightly ridiculous figure (who goes from a ludicrous pony-tail for his duel-to-the-death to a sort of swami outfit to something that looks like it ought to be upholstering a chair in a whorehouse) who is not quite up to the circumstances he finds himself in, but perseveres anyway. Smart, but hardly a criminal mastermind, his Frank is teamed with an especially charming Mimi Rogers. Hardly surprising that they go from insults to clinches, but it is appealing that the main thing keeping them apart (their abysmal track records in romance) is what, thanks to empathy, helps bridge the differences between them. The sci-fi gimmick here is really beside the point. What counts is the presence of several skillful actors and their deftly drawn characters. Stephen Tobolowsky is especially amusing, and he has the movie's best line: "You nonconformists are all alike."

After a successful robbery nets approximately $25 million in diamonds, "Frank Warren" (Rutger Hauer) is then shot and left for dead by his fiancé, "Noelle" (Joan Chen) and best friend "Sam" (James Remar). Unfortunately for his accomplices, not only did they not kill him but he also managed to hide the loot before being double-crossed. Complicating matters even further, after Frank's recovery he is then sent to a special high-security prison which contains both male and female convicts and uses a state-of-the-art collar known as a "wedlock" which is electronically linked to another prisoner whose identity is unknown. As long as both prisoners remain within the perimeters of the prison they are safe. But if either of them venture beyond 100 yards from each other their collars emit a warning sound giving them just seconds to correct the situation before exploding and killing both of them. As is so happens, however, a female prisoner named "Tracy Riggs" (Mimi Rogers) has discovered that Frank is her wedlocked partner and after informing him they manage to escape the prison with several people-including Noelle and Sam-following closely behind. Now rather than reveal any more I will just say that this was a fun futuristic movie which benefitted from the brisk pace and fine chemistry between Rutger Hauer and Mimi Rogers. I especially liked the dry sense of humor exhibited by Frank throughout the film as well. That being said, I heartedly recommend this film to any viewers who might be interested and have rated it accordingly.

Let's not kid ourselves : If you plan on watching this it's because Rutger Hauers face is on the box.

And I say box not poster because I doubt anyone really ever saw this in any theater. It's the kind of movie that gets put on cheap sets where two films share a disk or tape , at least that is how I watched it.

It being so cheap the publishers apparently reason giving it its own disk would be uneconomical is a massive plus though; you forgive all its flaws immediately because you do get far more then whatever you are likely to pay for it:Namely Rutger Hauer. And it's a good thing he's here !

The writing is both the film's major flaw and in the hands of Rutger Hauer its best feature.

Looking back on the writing alone feels like you are reading the overambitious project of someone who has previously only done short stories from time to time.It has some interesting ideas that normally don't work as well in a motion picture as they would in let's say a Isaac Asimov type collection of short stories. But while you can just feel that it would have turned into a absolute mess when left to others Hauer manages to emphasize every single tidbit that makes it worthwhile.

And if you get past the made-for-TV hammy qualities of it all there are some genuinely good concepts here. It makes you think, What gives someone the right to decide when someone is fit to be part of society?, Where is the line between rehabilitation and brainwashing ?( it is crossed in this film by the way , do doubt about it ). What parts of life can you control ?

Honestly the next time you go to your local supermarket you start thinking : What would be the reason they put this isle next to that ?, do i really want that bag of chips? And that alone is pretty impressive. Though it may not seem like a masterpiece its really memorable.

The casting besides Hauer seems like they all would be at least third picks for the role in most other productions.They are the kind of people that would be seen mostly in commercials from the time that this was made. As such the supporting cast's acting is far more hammy then Hauers is but it adds to the film. These people are fake ; they are wearing masks , they are forced to be something they aren't, or deliberately manipulating people into perceiving them in a way they can exploit. You can't know if a character is lying or is genuinely badly written and acted, and it's amazing.

Furthermore whenever it gets too annoying Hauer's character does something that will make you want to keep watching ,in fact he is more annoyed then you are! He is snarly , grumpy , and stressed out, while everyone around him is either manipulated to act according to a unnatural mold, or overtly against him. And he deals with it all in a way that makes you high five everyone in the room if you watch it with friends.

It's not the worlds best movie by any standard , but it genuinely makes you question those standards.

If it's not a good movie its still one of the best watching experiences I have ever had. It's more entertaining than some 'better' Rutger Hauer films in fact. I mean sure Blade Runner is a great film , but let me choose between Wedlock and Blade-Runners director's cut and I choose Wedlock!

It has a enjoyable pace and a runtime that is short enough for a fun campy evening along a few other movies. I highly recommend watching this with friends, I watched it with my roommates a few days after i saw it alone and it was even more fun! And i think that is how this film is meant to be seen.

It may seem like cheap entertainment because of that , but it does have cultural relevance. In fact although it's not as gory and a lot cheaper , it's a lot like Robocop. It's more than meets the eye.