Fortress

Welcome fellow subscribers to our next monthly installment of "Brucey's Monthly Crappy Movies".

From our last month's installment of "Survive the Game", nothing has really changed in Fortress.

In summary, Brucey's performances keep getting worse movie after movie. Again we have his smirking monotonic lines, only louder in this one. This guy is moving backwards in time with any acting skills or ability. Stay home Brucey, please retire. He was the worst I've seen in a long time in this one. For no reason, he's angry and talking loud. None of the other actor's performances were standout, and comparing even the many no-name actors, they were more convincing than Brucey.

The stories premise was interesting by newb writer (only 2nd writing credit) Alan Horsnail, (who also wrote "Midnight in the Switchgrass", of which I actually really enjoyed), but the screenplay was riddled with holes and some of the dialogue was cringeworthy. Some of the garbage that came out of Brucey's mouth will have you say "huh?" or my heading. Any attempts at humor were also cringe.

But were I once again was surprised, is that this horribly directed mess was from a seasoned director, James Cullen Bressack, who seems to direct most of Brucey's flops. Again in this mess, he gives us choppy blurred action sequences and horrible camera work. Did he even direct his cast? A 5th grader could've directed better. There is absolutely no excuse from anyone that has 43 directorial credits giving us this garbage over and over again. It's seems Bressack learns nothing from all his previous flops. Maybe take a break and go to film school? Funny as well, I saw Emile Hirsch and Randall Emmett's names in the closing credits as writers, but nowhere to be seen on this site. I'm guessing they deleted their names out of embarrassment.

The cinematography was decent, and the score was typical B-grade cheese. The pacing was very slow, that even at 99 mins, it felt much longer. There was just too much filler and very little substance. It's a very generous 3/10, mainly all going to Kelly Greyson, who's smokeshow bod woke me up every time she appeared on screen when I was dozing off from boredom.

"Fortress" is a movie that will bore you to death. No really, I do not understand what Bruce is doing here. After watching his previous flops ("Survive the game", "Apex", "Hard Kill" etc.) Too many bad movies to write down here. Bruce Willis has had a rewarding career as a butt-kicking action star from his days in the 'Die-Hard' Franchise. However, as age catches up with him, he can't quite move the way he used to, and he seems to be losing his flair as the projects he has been landing latest aren't the Box office kind of titles. All his latest movies are not worth watching. I try to understand but it seems that he lost his appetite for acting. Is he trying to set the world record for acting bad in every new movie featuring Bruce? I don´t get it. This was only part one, so two more to come as it is apparently a Trilogy. Aren´t we lucky? But just maybe part 2 and 3 will be so good that we forget all the recent films with Bruce. Also when he speaks, he lost his tonality. We have to wait 66 minutes before we hear Bruce with his acting voice. But by then the movie is over. The combat scenes with the sexy girls are ridiculous but sometimes fun to watch. The storyline is better than his recent movies, not his acting. For me there was one surprise. Outstanding acting from Michael Sirow, who plays Ken Blain. One of the US Special forces who is befriended with Robert (Bruce Willis). Michael Sirow also plays in "Survive the game", just like Chad Michael Murray (Balzary). The only difference is that Michael has something extra to give to the audience. Chad´s acting is consistent, meaning he cannot act better given the cast and the plot / storyline to work with. Overall a 4/10 which is twice as high as I rated Bruce his last movies. If you are a Bruce Willis fan, you might enjoy this movie. But if you are a "Die Hard" fan, you will not. No punch lines, no funny quotes, nothing but emptiness.

Given that we now know he has dementia/ mental impairment, it's a shame Bruce Willis was allowed to act in this film. It was sad to see him perform in this film, but this isn't Willis acting. This was a sick person who is no longer himself.

The rest of the film was a low budget disaster. Bad acting, cheesy plot with holes like Swiss cheese. It's awful. The fact that a secure compound is breeched and people are walking around like it's a picnic is just awful. A base under attack and everyone is just hanging out as they get shot. Just goofy and totally unbelievable. A military installation and no backups coming in. No overwhelming force called in to repel a little group of insurgents. Just bad. The film in no way resembles real life. It's so bad it's almost funny.

Bruce Willis and his recent films became the trade mark of cheep trash filmography. I stopped watching this after 20 minutes. The man must have serious financial problems, participating over and over in cheep and bad films. Not even for free this one. What a shame.

Bruce Willis is still a great actor, but there is only so much a great actor can do to save an inferior movie. Imdb rating of 3.2, that'll predict not the highest quality possible, to put it politely. Especially the supporting actors are way below average. The special effects tend to look somewhat cheap as well. Lack of suspense is another topic...

BUT...

At an (excrucially) important sidenote, let us not forget WHY we are watching Bruce Willis movies to begin with. We watch Bruce Willis movies because of DIE HARD (1988). THE ONE AND ONLY BIGGEST ACTION AMERICAN ACTION CLASSIC OF THE CENTURY.

This classic is still standing strong after more than 30 years. Millions of people still REwatch it during every Christmas holiday. Recently a petition was launched to rename Nakatomi Plaza into DIE HARD plaza.

A life time achievement award for Bruce Willis is in the making.

DIE HARD (1988) NEVER DIES but is still ALIVE AND KICKING IN 2022. Happy New Year!