Equalizer 2000

Equalizer 2000 (1987)

* 1/2 (out of 4)

Here's another low-budget post-Apocalyptic film that deals with a gang of bad guys who want to control everything that remains in the dirty world. The only problem is that they run up against Slade (Richard Norton) who creates a new gun that makes him a major threat to all.

EQUALIZER 2000 was one of many rip-offs of MAD MAX and THE ROAD WARRIOR that would be made and thrown on video store shelves back in the 1980s. If you were lucky enough to grow up during this era then you know that if a movie was popular in theaters then low-budget producers would try and make a killing with the rip-offs. Director Cirio H. Santiago made several of these in the Philippines so I guess the best thing to say is that this is better than THE SISTERHOOD.

If you're looking for nothing but action then you'll get plenty of that here. There are fast cars speeding around everywhere. You've got non-stop gun fights, explosions and various other action scenes that were all done with very little money and it shows. You've got a lot of eye candy going on here but there's no question that the story itself is very boring and it all grows rather tiresome very quickly.

If you're a fan of these type of low-budget, direct-to-video films then I'm sure you'll get a kick out of this one. As it stands, it was just too boring and way too bland for its own good.

This movie really sucks, but still it´s fun to watch. For 90 minutes it´s just gunfights and explosions. No talking, just shooting. It´s amazing to see fully grown men act like this, and being serious about it! If you have nothing to do on a late Sunday night, then give this one a try!

B movie perennial Richard Norton ("Force: Five") stars as a hero named Slade in this little epic, just one of many grungy post-apocalypse features to pattern itself after "Mad Max" and "The Road Warrior". Slade is out to get revenge on a military unit dubbed "The Ownership", who are just greedy enough to want control of all resources. They meet resistance from Slade and other rebels, "mountain people", and a sexy as Hell warrior woman named Karen (Penthouse hottie Corinne Wahl). But Slade has an ace up his sleeve: the sleek and massive weapon of the title, which ensures its owners' survival.

Fans of derivative future set schlock won't mind that the story (written by co-star Frederick Bailey, who plays Hayward) is practically non existent. It's all about non-stop (and I do mean non-stop) gunfire, explosions, and setting people on fire. (This is the kind of movie where nobody ever seems to run out of ammo.) While it's hard to give much of a damn about any character here, the actors do what they can with limited material. Norton is fortunately one very badass hero; he can shoot at the bad guys while perched on the hood of a car, and not lose his balance. Wahl isn't much of an actress, but it's doubtful that many people will care when she looks so fine. William Steis (as Lawton) and Peter Shilton (as MacLaine) are adequate villains. Any fan of Filipino exploitation cinema will be happy to see Vic Diaz here, as he portrays one of those "mountain people". But the most fun is in seeing future star Robert Patrick, in his second feature film appearance, as a mangy weasel named Deke.

Passable direction by Cirio H. Santiago and amusing electronic music by Ding Achacoso help to make this an okay diversion.

Five out of 10.

Sometimes you just need a questionable 80s action flick. Hey, if nothing else, I'm a fan of Richard Norton, and it's noteworthy that this is an early role of Robert Patrick. The filming locations are gorgeous, Ding Achacoso's music (that I, for one, love) recalls themes that Nobuo Uematsu wrote for the 'Final fantasy' series of videogames at varying points (perhaps with additional influences on top, like Henry Mancini and high school marching bands), the vehicles are modified from the last 'Mad Max' production, and the costume design is comprised of the standard issue black fascist uniforms, military fatigues, and post-apocalyptic civilian rags. Action sequences are built on the principals of running, chasing, and shooting, but somehow feel sterile and bereft, possibly because the music is ill-fitting. This rather looks and feels so much like something the Band family might have produced in the same timeframe, like 'The Eliminators' or 'Metalstorm: The destruction of Jared-Syn,' and it's surprising that Charles or Albert weren't actually involved. Dropping those names may well be the best indicator of the company 'Equalizer 2000' keeps, but for what it's worth, in terms of fare of this nature, it's pretty much on par thirty years on.

I'll say this much, the movie knows what it is - and what it is, friend, is ninety minutes of action (okay, eighty-eight) with light, thin plot (rebels versus fascists, with scattered third party elements on the side) breaking up that action at irregular intervals. Even though such scenes are robbed of some of their vitality they still look good in and of themselves, with stunts and effects galore; then again, even the use of some of these seem a smidgen senseless and willy-nilly at times. I could have actually done with more plot, as that may have provided a shot in the arm that the action doesn't, but here we are. I actually think this is fairly well made, all told, and the issue is just that the result is weirdly middling. Is it the acting? Is it the direction? Is it the flimsiness and ordinariness of the story? Is it the fact that the MacGuffin, the titular object, is a single handheld weapon? Norton doesn't even get to really exercise his martial arts skills; a love scene feels extra contrived as it's shot. I don't know if the feature needed more energy, more extras, more story, better acting, stronger direction, or what, but it uniformly feels like something we can "watch" without ever actively engaging - and more than I might say of other titles of which I've said the same.

You could do worse; you could also do a lot better. The most important question might be "why bother at all?" If one has a specific impetus to watch, like being a fan of someone involved, that might be motivation enough. Without such impetus, though, there's not really any need to check it out. If anything, set 'Equalizer 2000' aside for a quiet, lazy day, something you can put on in the background, and that may be the best way to appreciate it. It's decent, I guess, but just not something that particularly inspires enthusiasm. Take that as you will.

Rating Breakdown: Story - 1.00 :: Direction - 1.00 :: Pacing - 0.75 :: Performances - 0.75 :: Entertainment - 1.00 TOTAL - 4.5/10

Ah, the Eighties-a decade when dystopian sci-fi films meant wastelands, explosions, and shoulder pads so large they could double as aircraft hangars. And in this grand tradition of bargain-bin Mad Max knock-offs comes Equalizer 2000, a film that asks: "What if a gun was the main character?"

The plot, if you can call it that, follows Slade, a soldier for the evil Corporation (because all futuristic dystopias have one), who turns against his employers after his friend is murdered. He wanders through the desert, meeting various factions of people who all look like they got lost on their way to a Road Warrior convention, and then, with the help of an old friend of his father's, he builds the ultimate weapon-the Equalizer 2000. It is less of a gun and more of an artillery installation strapped to one man, and it exists solely to resolve the film's many, many conflicts in the loudest way possible.

Character development is nonexistent. Slade is not a hero, nor is he an anti-hero-he is simply a man attached to a machine gun. Richard Norton, an actual martial artist, is bafflingly underused until the final act, while Robert Patrick, in one of his earliest roles, injects some much-needed charisma into an otherwise cardboard cast. But the real stars here are the explosions-glorious, real, and reckless, a tribute to a time when stuntmen risked life and limb for your entertainment.

It is not good. It is not intelligent. But it is honest in its mission: big gun, big bangs, big fun. Would I watch it again? Not for a long time. But if you want a perfect slice of Eighties schlock for a lazy afternoon, it is ready and waiting.