Warlords 3000
(1992)
Director: Faruque Ahmed
Cast: Jay Roberts, Denise Marie Duff, Steve Blanchard
Here is another case when I wish there there were truth
in advertising laws concerning video boxes. To begin with, the warrior
pictured on the video box of
Warlords 3000 not only is brandishing
weapons and wearing clothing that the movie's main protagonist (or, for
that matter, anyone else in the movie) never has anywhere in the actual
film, the warrior pictured is not even the actor who actually appears
in the movie. Well, this kind of visual deception happens so much, that
many of us (including myself), have become kind of used to it.
I might have been able to accept this alone, but the video box goes
further in its deception. Not only does it deceive with a picture, but
it deceives with its title - there are not 3000 warlords in Warlords
3000! Instead there's just one, maybe two if you stretch the
criteria a little. Besides, in the movie itself, the opening credits
proclaim that what's about to play is called Warlord 3000
- no "s". Though even then, neither of
the two warlords here don't seem to be 3000th in a line of warlords. If
the "3000" part of the title is supposed to be the year
of the events seen in this movie, it seems kind of strange then that
the amount of technology seen here seems to be that of the late 20th
century, even if the world seen here is that of a post-environmental
holocaust.
Now I know that the above sounds like real-nitpicking,
and that you have to suspend your disbelief to a degree when you are
watching most sci-fi/fantasy movies. But at the same time, such movies
have to do their part to convince you that the worlds they are
portraying even have a foot in plausibility. When they instead keep
constantly slapping your face with an attitude that suggests contempt
for the audience, how can you find in yourself the courtesy to do any
favors for them in return? Doing something badly is bad enough, but
doing something bad with no sign that you are even trying to do good is
even worse. Warlords 3000 is so unimaginative, so badly
done, that it barely even qualifies as a movie. About the only thing
that qualifies it as a movie is that it runs 92 minutes - 92 of the
most painful, endless, and torturous minutes you can't possibly imagine.
Both the movie's awfulness and lack of originality
become evident even before the movie properly starts off. While we see
endless footage of red radioactive skies (whoa, the colors), a
senior-sounding narrator sets up the situation for us. This is
obviously inspired by the opening of The Road Warrior,
even more so when you realize that, just as it was in The Road
Warrior, this aged narrator is subsequently seen meeting the
Mad Max-like hero when he was a child. Oh, and the child in this movie
is also quiet most of the time, as well as being unintelligible the few
times he uses his mouth (Even though the child here is speaking
English, he delivers his lines so badly I couldn't understand what he
said.)
The narrator tells us that some kind of environmental holocaust
happened, but he's remarkably coy in telling us just what exactly
happened to screw up the world so badly. Subsequently, he starts to
describe what the world is like now, comparing it to what the movie's
central protagonist (named Nova) told him what the world was like
(despite the fact that from what we see, these two characters spent
virtually no time together.) The narrator tells us that Nova told him
the incredible fact that the skies were once blue (despite the fact
that in several shots we see bluish skies), and that you could once eat
many kinds of plants (despite the fact that we later see characters
with flour and French fries in their possession.)
This and other instances of contradictory narration is bad enough, but
what is even worse is that this
pompous, overly theatrical narrator refuses to shut up. For the next
few minutes he keeps yak-yaking in his colorful tongue until you want
to strangle him so that he'll shut up. Eventually, he does - but not
for long. Every so often, he returns to torture us with his flowerly
speech to explain to us what the characters are feeling, important plot
points that we never got to see, and.... Yes, I agree with you - the
makers of this movie decided to use excess narration because of
excessive laziness, or because there were a number of problems during
the shoot that resulted in an inadequate amount of footage that would
properly explain every plot point. I'm not sure which reason is more
likely, because there's additional evidence to suggest either
possibility. Sometimes the evidence suggests both possibilities, such
as the fact that the movie shows off a lot of footage that was filmed
of dirt bikes and other off-road vehicles racing along the dunes...
that was apparently filmed at a real desert race rally, segments of
which are edited in every few minutes with the explanation that these
racers are the movie's drug-crazed bad guys, who spend much of their
time aimlessly racing along these dunes.
I guess before I get further into who is who and who does what, I
should first better explain the setup for this movie's post-apocalypse
setting. But... I really can't. All the plot really consists of is yet
another tired retelling of the old "revenge for a slaughtered family
that had been preparing for the hero's homecoming" story, though it's
never been so tediously told before. There is no possible reason why it
should take the protagonist - who, naturally, is a deadly fighter - so
long in completing his task. Except, of course, for the possibility
that the people who made this movie had no idea how to properly stretch
out the hero's quest for revenge for a hour and a half. So after the
slaughter the rest of the first hour, apart from the hero occasionally
remembering he's got to kill someone, consists mostly of three kinds of
scenes:
(1) The brooding hero doing nothing but hanging around a bar, one that
strangely has the capacity to distribute printed matchbooks advertising
itself
(2) The villain screaming at his idiot henchmen to do better, including
one bizarre sequence when he lectures his henchmen with the use of a
chalkboard as a teaching device, writing the word RUTHLESS on it ("The
word of the day!")
(3) Vignettes that have no influence on the plot or characters. Not
just with the use of the desert rally footage, but scenes such as when
two goons play "keepaway" with a grown woman's teddy bear, or when the
hero cures someone suffering from a seizure by repeatedly punching the
patient in the head
Some of this material, as you might have guessed, does provide some
unintended laughs, so I guess there is something positive to say about it. Mostly,
though, it's just tedious, and just adds to the frustration generated
by the protagonist's inability to get on with it. Then at the one hour
mark, the screenplay takes an even worse turn by introducing a new
villain out of the blue. Not that the idea of introducing someone new
so far into the movie could never have any potential, but the fact that
this doesn't do anything out of the ordinary to what's going on in the
movie. Does the introduction of this additional villain add an extra
dimension to the hero's quest for revenge, further develop any of the
supporting characters, or simply add an interesting subplot? Nope, none
of those things and nothing else, save, of course, just to further slow
down our protagonist's quest for revenge for several more minutes.
Well, maybe they were just trying to make our protagonist look more
"good" by introducing more "evil", though it's too little, too late.
Besides, in the course of the movie he doesn't always exactly do things
that endear us to him. In one scene, he plants a bomb on the outer wall
of a shack belonging to one of the bad guys. You may be able to shrug
off the peculiarity of the subsequent explosion originating in the interior
of the house, but probably not the fact that the bomb kills not just
the bad guy but his totally innocent abused girlfriend. In another
scene, he stays in hiding until the bad guys kill an innocent old man,
only then deciding to jump out and fight. Nice guy.
I don't want to talk about the movie's "story" any further, though I
don't think I could find anything else to talk about even if I wanted
to. Instead, I just want to talk about what else the movie has to offer
- more exactly, I want to talk about just how equally bad
everything else is. Just name a typical aspect found in a movie and
I'll tell you how it's screwed up here. The musical score? Triumphant
music during a rape sequence, and elsewhere sounding like a six year
old boy drumming on coffee cans and water pipes. Cinematography?
Blurred and dark, with murky visuals even during the brighter
sequences. Just look at the pictures with this review for a sample.
Editing? At one point in a fight sequence, the hero falls to the floor
unconscious, then in the next cut he's suddenly on his hands and knees
still trying to fight. Later in the movie, our hero strangles a guy by
whipping a rope around his neck - but we never actually see a shot of
our hero using or even just holding the piece of rope.
(Instead we just get extreme close-ups of our hero's face during the
sequence.) With all that and much more, it is perhaps inevitable that
there is also at least one instance where the editor had to reuse some
footage that previously played in the movie.
Besides sharing a lot of the problems that you find in
other bad movies, the movie manages to conjure up
it's own unique awfulness to a large degree, which comes in the form of
questions. For example: If the bomb our hero uses to destroy that
aforementioned shack has a timer, why does it also have a fuse attached
to it? How come at one point when our hero returns to the bar, he has
to join a line where entering patrons get poison dust blown off of them
- but at no other time previously or subsequently does he have to do
this? If there is still an organized government and an army, why are so
many defenseless people choosing to live out in the wasteland where
they are in more danger? How is it possible that our hero's family
lives in a house where inside there are windows as well as strong and
smooth wood walls... but the outside of the house is a rusted-out tin
warehouse with no windows? Okay, maybe I spent more time
thinking about these kind of things than the average person, but I had
to have something to do while watching this movie.
Check for availability on Amazon (VHS)
See also: Neon City, Omega Doom, Stryker
|