Maniac Cop 2 (1990)

Let's kick this off with a disclaimer. In fact, let's do a slew of disclaimers. I haven't seen the first Maniac Cop movie, nor have I seen the 1980 movie, Maniac (which I understand to be a different series, but I'm guessing there's some sort of tenuous thematic or conceptual connection, given both were directed by William Lustig). More than that, the Maniac Cop movies are drifting either into or adjacent to the exploitation genre, an area where my experience is limited. If you're a fan of that stuff, you're probably not going to think much of my opinion (though, for what it's worth, I do have a few nice things to say about aspects of this movie). But the corollary of that is if you're not a fan - or especially if you have no idea what I'm talking about or who William Lustig is - you're probably better off taking my advice and steering clear of this.

For the most part, I found this boring, which is a surprising complaint given this movie is about a zombie cop rising from the dead to take his revenge against those who wronged him, and also just randomly kill a bunch of other people (I'm very unclear what Cordell's motivation is supposed to be, but - again - I didn't see the first movie, so grain of salt and all that). Whatever the rationale, assuming there was one, the movie sort of meanders from one violent sequence to the next, pausing for characters to go off on tangents about corruption or on side treks into strip clubs. There's very little connective tissue between scenes: this feels like a movie intended to be made up entirely of "good bits," only most of those aren't actually all that good, either (at least not in retrospect).

There are a couple exceptions. There are two car sequences, almost back-to-back, that feature some impressive stunt work and premises. The first involves the protagonists trying to escape the titular Maniac Cop while driving a taxi with a flat tire, resulting in some really cool, stylish spark effects that imbue the sequence with frantic energy and tension. Soon after, a character finds herself handcuffed to the steering wheel of an out-of-control car from the outside through an open window as it rolls through traffic. It's a bizarre premise (with some pretty obvious logic problems), but it's handled well enough to make for an amusing and suspenseful set piece.

There was also an extended sequence at the end where the undead killer is on fire, which must have involved some great stunt work. I didn't find that section particularly interesting or engaging to watch, but I was impressed from a technical standpoint. Perhaps that counts as a compliment? There won't be many more.

What's there to say about this thing's plot? The movie opens with footage from the end of the first movie showing that film's hero, Jack (the legendary Bruce Campbell, but don't get excited) defeating the zombified Cordell (Robert Z'Dar) and sending him driving off a pier while impaled by a pole. Also present is Theresa (Laurene Landon), who I guess must have been important in the first movie.

Jack's screentime is so limited, I can only assume Campbell was too busy to sign on for more than a bit part - his character is killed from behind while reading a newspaper. Theresa at least gets to fight back when she's offed a little later. But I guess it doesn't matter, since they're effectively replaced with new protagonists, Susan (Claudia Christian, who'd go on to play a major role on Babylon 5) and Sean (Robert Davi, who had a minor but memorable role in Die Hard). Sean's a tough-as-nails detective, while Susan is a police psychologist. Like the characters they're replacing, they soon butt heads with their superiors, who are still trying to cover up Cordell's involvement, since he was originally framed and killed to conceal government and police corruption.

Also, there's a different serial killer, Turkell (Leo Rossi), who stalks and strangles strippers. That subplot is almost certainly in the movie to give them an excuse to show topless women, which.... Okay, here's the thing: this certainly does the exploitation thing, but it actually kind of subverts the misogyny you usually get from '80s and '90s horror movie depictions of exotic dancers. One of his targets, Cheryl (actress Paula Trickey, who also appears in the 2003 movie, A Carol Christmas) escapes, and becomes a minor character. The movie portrays her as a competent woman whose job is less morally dubious than the cops she assists in identifying and arresting Turkell. In contrast, Turkell is depicted as a pathetic, idiotic lunatic with delusions of grandeur who's likely avoided capture because the world hasn't been prioritizing the safety of his victims. That doesn't nullify the exploitation aspect, but it's a lot better than I expected from this sort of film.

By then, Turkell has sort of befriended Cordell, though it's unclear what if anything Cordell is thinking. Still, he winds up breaking Turkell out of prison in a Terminator-inspired massacre of the police precinct. They steal a prison bus and head to Sing-Sing, with Turkell under the impression they're going to free everyone on Death Row and enlist them into some sort of serial-killer army. Really, Cordell just wants to kill the prisoners who killed him.

Oh, they also take Susan hostage, so there'll be some stakes.

Nothing actually seems to hurt Cordell, so Sean tries a different tact. He grabs the police commissioner and guilts him into confessing his involvement in framing Cordell, an act that will result in the overturning of his conviction. This seems to cause Cordell to reconsider some of his post-life choices, though he continues hunting the men who killed him. They light him on fire, he kills them (or at least most of them), then Turkell and Cordell fight. Cordell pushes them both through a wall, they fall onto the prison bus, and they both explode.

It... doesn't really make sense in the movie, either. But we're supposed to think that hearing that his case will be reopened makes Cordell repent, and his death is somehow at least partially redemptive. As a reminder, we just watched him murder like thirty people, many of whom were completely innocent. Whatever.

There's an epilogue showing Cordell being laid to rest with police honors (again, whatever), and Sean has a monologue about how all close all cops are to becoming Cordell. Which... I think is an acknowledgment that police brutality is a terrifying reality? So, good theme at least. I doubt most of the movie's audience walked out with that message in 1990, but I appreciate the effort.

Also, the movie is set around Christmas, as evidenced from holiday decorations, lights, and - unless I missed something - precisely zero lines of dialogue. I can't find much info on the production of this, but my takeaway while watching was the setting was most likely an unintended side effect of the filming schedule. This strikes me a case where it was easier to add decorations to inside scenes than to shoot around them in exterior sequences. Beyond that, there really wasn't much justification for the holidays.

In fact, there may have been a reason to not set this around Christmas, if Wikipedia and IMDB are to be believed. Apparently, the first movie ended just after Saint Patrick's Day, and the sequel picks up immediately after. So either Saint Patrick's Day got moved to December, or there's a pretty large continuity error.

This could of course have explored themes surrounding the end of an old year and the lingering presence of the past. Or it could have leveraged the holidays as tonal elements to evoke the feeling of Christmas ghost stories. Or... I don't know... it could have folded in religion in some way. But it doesn't do any of that, so I'm going with "this was when they had to shoot the movie, they had to make the most of it" as the reason for the cinematic season.

For what it's worth, the holiday lights made the outdoors sequences (virtually all of which are at night) look cooler. Actually, the cinematography was pretty good all around, considering this was a direct-to-video production. Nothing special (outside of that taxi cab sequence), but solid work.

I don't have a lot to say about this one. Apparently, Lustig considers it his best film. I haven't seen any of his other movies, so I have no opinion on that. And it certainly has its proponents who consider it an underappreciated gem. Between the car sequences and themes, I can almost see why, but I really can't endorse the opinion. The movie just isn't interesting enough, the acting and directing feel phoned in outside of the action set pieces, and the whole thing just feels like a jumble of scenes awkwardly stitched together. I can appreciate a few aspects, but I didn't enjoy watching this at all. Unless you're someone with a compelling reason to track it down, I strongly recommend you look elsewhere.