Sunset Grill (1993) from Johnny Web (Uncle Scoopy; Greg Wroblewski) and Tuna

In the Olympics they won't let a 150 pound man wrestle against a 170 pound man because it just isn't a fair match. But in the movies, one drunken stumblebum private eye armed with a BB gun can overcome all of the following:

  1. Several corrupt INS officials
  2. The Mexican border federales.
  3. The world's richest man and several doctors, who are running a scam to use illegal immigrants as unwilling heart and liver donors.
  4. The world's richest man's connections, which "go so high up the ladder God can't see the top".
  5. Thugs who look like a cross between Dolph Lundgren and Andre the Giant, and are better armed than the Iraqi army.
  6. Treacherous girlfriends.
  7. Incompetent associates.
  8. Sarcastic bartenders.


Nude scenes from three different women: Lori Singer, Alexandra Paul, Sandra Wild. All three actresses got naked. All possible exposure from Wild, breasta nd buns from the other two.

The DVD version has an additional three and a half minutes of uncut footage - soundless raw footage of Robocop and Alexandra Paul doin' the nasty.

Very realistic movie.

Stacy Keach plays, or maybe I should say overplays, the world's richest man, and he says that ripping hearts out of living victims is OK because:

  • They are doing it for a good cause, to give the gift of life to senior members of the Republican Party and other equally important members of society.
  • The Aztecs did it, and his own victims are descended from the Aztecs, so they are culturally prepared for it.

OK, fair enough. I was having some problem with it, but then when he explained the Aztec thing, I could relate to it.

It appears that Robocob thought he was starring in a Vincent van Gogh biopic

DVD info from Amazon

  • OK, the film isn't so great, but if you are a real connoisseur of celebrity nudity, you need to own this DVD, which includes three and a half minutes of deleted scenes. That is, my friends, 210 seconds of Robocop and Alexandra Paul fuckin' !

  • widescreen anamorphic 1.78:1

I think I've pointed out that in an earlier life I was an Aztec. In fact, I still hold the Aztec record for finishing second in the Aztec games for 32 consecutive years. In a bizarre example of reverse genetic engineering, the Aztecs would rip out the hearts of the winners, since only the finest specimens were adequate propitiations for the Gods.

I remember giving many a heartfelt interview with reporters for the Aztec Times, where I apologized to my fans and those who bet on me, and explained that I couldn't fathom how I blew a 40 yard lead in the 100 yard dash, and promised to train much harder for the next year's games, because I was really looking forward to the honor of having my heart ripped out.


I differ with Scoop in my reactions. While the improbability of a drunken small statured leading man who didn't like to shoot real guns beating the entire world's complement of bad guys bothered Scoopy, I bought into the character. He didn't like shooting real guns, preferring a BB gun because it was quiet. If I woke up every day with a huge hangover, I might feel the same way. It wasn't that he couldn't shoot a real gun, and he in fact did a few times, and was a master marksman. At one time, he was a competent detective, and lots of people saved his tail frequently in the film. His motivation, of course, was the murder of the only thing her still cared about, his wife. In short, I loved his character, and liked the fact that he was mainly fighting corrupt establishment types.

The Critics Vote

  • no major reviews online

The People Vote ...

The meaning of the IMDb score: 7.5 usually indicates a level of excellence equivalent to about three and a half stars from the critics. 6.0 usually indicates lukewarm watchability, comparable to approximately two and a half stars from the critics. The fives are generally not worthwhile unless they are really your kind of material, equivalent to about a two star rating from the critics, or a C- from our system. Films rated below five are generally awful even if you like that kind of film - this score is roughly equivalent to one and a half stars from the critics or a D on our scale. (Possibly even less, depending on just how far below five the rating is.

My own guideline: A means the movie is so good it will appeal to you even if you hate the genre. B means the movie is not good enough to win you over if you hate the genre, but is good enough to do so if you have an open mind about this type of film. C means it will only appeal to genre addicts, and has no crossover appeal. (C+ means it has no crossover appeal, but will be considered excellent by genre fans, while C- indicates that it we found it to be a poor movie although genre addicts find it watchable). D means you'll hate it even if you like the genre. E means that you'll hate it even if you love the genre. F means that the film is not only unappealing across-the-board, but technically inept as well. Any film rated C- or better is recommended for fans of that type of film. Any film rated B- or better is recommended for just about anyone. We don't score films below C- that often, because we like movies and we think that most of them have at least a solid niche audience. Now that you know that, you should have serious reservations about any movie below C-.

Based on this description, this is a C-. Scoop says, "Lame, laughable premise, but once you get past that, it's a watchable film for Grade-B noir afficionados, because it is sexy and has some good performances and good moments to help patch over the weak spots. The extra DVD footage and decent widescreen transfer make it a must-own for celebrity nudity buffs."  Tuna says, "I agree with the C- rating. While I enjoyed the film, not everyone will react the way I did to it."

Return to the Movie House home page