Equalizer 2000

• Directed by Cirio H. Santiago
• May 19, 1987 (US)

A ruthless motorized gang rules the post-apocalyptic wasteland of Alaska until a man using a gun called the Equalizer 2000 declares war. There is no good way to summarize the plot.

When it comes right down to it, the basics of the plot of Equalizer 2000 are no different than those of the Western classic Winchester ‘73. Both are about a gun that changes hands a few times and the impact the title gun has on the assorted possessors. I guess that makes this a post-apocalyptic Western movie.

Equalizer 2000 opens with a gun battle that feels like it goes on forever. There’s a lot of machine guns and one guy using a revolver that never seems to run out of bullets. It was a bit of a cliché in the 80s that you never saw anybody re-load one. This is one of many extended gun battles feeling like padding to stretch a very confused film with no strong story out into nearly 90 minutes. If they were exciting it might be better but you get no sense of the battle so you never care. The ebbs and flows are a complete mystery with the focus being on bullets and explosions.

I’m kind of lost on who the good guys and the bad guys are. We have rebels and we have the Ownership (which I’m assuming are the bad guys) but in the opening of the movie nobody really comes off that well. You would be hard-pressed by the time Robert Patrick (in his second movie) gets on the screen to understand whether he’s one of the good guys or the bad guys.

The longer this went on the more I found myself smiling if not laughing. It’s just so poorly done. They just grabbed some cameras and began filming it. It’s confused and lumbering while being poorly directed and badly acted. For a post-apocalyptic wasteland the people are incredibly clean and well groomed. At least in the Mad Max films they looked dirty. A century after a nuclear war and a distinct lack of resources or a significant manufacturing base yet they drink canned beer that I swear said Colt 45 on the side. Then again, an emblem on one of the soldiers is a pot leaf so I’m not sure if they thought too much through.

Why is the character of Slade (Richard Norton) automatically labeled a deserter? Is there some kind of beef between him and the other guy? And his loyalty switches pretty quickly. Admittedly, a friend and literally (I guess) his father died or at least the person was someone close to him. If this were better done I might have a better idea.

The title weapon is a super gun of sorts called the Equalizer 2000 that everybody wants. The way it looks makes me think of that gun from The Fifth Element. You know the one I’m talking about. While that gun was intended to be humorous, the featured one here is not. Th Equalizer 2000 is the very thing a kid from the 80s who had seen one too many action films might dream up.

In addition to the affects of the gun on those that hold it, this movie tries to say a little bit about war. There’s a scene right before the closing credits after the climactic battle where the people having seen the horrors of war toss their assorted weapons on a small fire. Never mind the heat accidentally setting off ammunition. I like the sentiment, but the guns they throw are clearly wooden props just painted black. There is no missing it. Maybe it wasn’t as noticeable back in the day, but you notice it now.

One thing this gets right is that it’s connected to another film called Wheels of Fire. It takes place in the same universe though you don’t need to have watched that film to understand what’s going on here. A few casual references for those who know make it clear but for the uninformed is just world building.

Equalizer 2000 is just a mess and that’s putting it nicely. The fights are slow and boring and it just goes on a little too long with not enough to justify its length. As an example of a Mad Max knock off, I’ve seen better.