Okay, I don't really know where to start on this one other to say that I will include spoilers because of what I plan on mentioning. The trailer for this new Godzilla is very deceiving, as is the case with most trailers anyway but this one is especially so. The trailer has the title monster in most of it with Bryan Cranston and surprise surprise Mr. Cranston is in the film for maybe 20 minutes at best. Which that doesn't bother me much anyway seeing how I am not a fan of his to begin with. The film is actually starring Aaron Taylor-Johnson, which most should know for his role as Kick-Ass. I do believe the acting is done okay...just okay that is. Ken Watanabe is seriously underused because in my opinion he is the best of the entire cast.
Another thing that people who know me already know of is I am a Godzilla fan from way back. Obviously not as far back as the beginning because I wasn't even alive yet. But I do love all the old Big G films. The 98 American one was crap from beginning to end so I was expecting something not even close to that with this new American redo. I hate to say it but I think they just gave us another shitty American Godzilla. Maybe that is blasphemous to say for some but you gotta listen to what I have to say about it first. I may be rambling on some about it and mix a bunch of stuff together so bear with me some.
First things first though and that is, why are there so many humans in this film? I mean really, think about it, the movie is called GODZILLA! So, lets put him in the background when he is doing anything we actually want to see in favor of the humans that noone on the planet went to watch this film to see. It makes absolutely no sense to me at all. If the filmmakers wanted to make a Godzilla movie that had respect for the original film then maybe they should have made the title character the main character. He doesn't even show until halfway through and that is only in bits and pieces. About 3/4 of the way through we get a full body showing and he is a beautiful sight which brings up why did they not want him as the main character? Something else on the subject of the monster himself, through the entire movie it goes from night to day. I don't normally have a problem with a film that spans days but I did with this one. Godzilla shows at night 95% of the time he is on screen. The very few times he makes an appearance during the day a door closes on the action or they make the humans more important. It is really upsetting. When it comes to special effects films, nothing bothers me more than when they make it too dark or too rainy or too foggy or a mixture of the three. What the filmmakers are trying to say is that their effects people aren't good enough to make it realistic so lets cover it with darkness and other stuff. I would have loved this movie as it was filmed if they just made it all during the day or maybe lightened the night time scenes a bit.
When it comes to the writing of this film I am also in the dislike zone. During this film the human characters say on multiple occasions that the monsters are attracted to radioactive material and they absorb it also. With that being said, why did the writers write the humans deciding to make a kill attempt on these monsters with none other than a nuclear device? Something tells me that isn't going to help and I don't blame the actors for this because they were just reading a script written by a moron. Yes, I said it, a moron. As most who have read anything I have written here will know I am not a writer! But, I do believe I could write a better Godzilla movie than Dave Callaham. He has nine writing credits and one is for Doom and four are for The Expendables films. I think he may be one of the worst writers in all of Hollywood. Okay so maybe that was uncalled for. He is in the top five crappiest writers in Hollywood.
I was so excited for this film after I saw the trailers and I said before that was one of the problems with it. I do understand showing a trailer of a film that makes people want to see it because let's face it Hollywood wants to make money and if they made a trailer of a bunch of people with a monster mostly in the background it wouldn't make any. And one more thing that's hard for me to say is at least the film Pacific Rim had the monsters and robots front and center. Not the case with the film that should have had "front and center"...ah...front and center! But I think I should have believed the posters, here is the theatrical poster..
Both posters I have put here pretty much tell you what your gonna get with this one. More people and a little bit of monsters. Also, notice both have alot of fog as well. I feel cheated!
This film got released in 1996 and it is great, even to today's standards. I would dare say that even the CGI is good, I am coming of course from when it was made. But there are a few times when the effects are even equal to that of Smaug. People may laugh at that but I am being serious about it. I may be alone in saying that Smaug wasn't that great, I thought he looked cool but not great. Draco on the other hand has some spectacular scenes and I will admit that a few of the times with him talking are a bit off but as a whole it is a great movie.
Directed by Rob Cohen, the man responsible for The Fast and The Furious, Dragon, The Bruce Lee Story and a few other mediocre pictures. In my opinion, this is his best film. I think he accomplished what he went out to do and that is make a fun movie with a good story, great action set pieces and some comedy thrown in for good measure. It is mixed pretty well.
With a ton of big named actors, although most weren't as known as they are today, and most put in a rather cheesy job. The cheesiness goes with the film well though and it adds that extra bit of comedy. It is a movie that doesn't take itself too serious and the acting just proves it. I think they made it to entertain and it does that with flying colors. Movies aren't made this way anymore, for the sole purpose to entertain the public. Now it has to be over the top, too shocking, extra gross or have a story where you have to watch it 12 times to understand it. Why can't they just have a simple story and make it a good film? I do occasionally want to watch a thought provoking movie but for the most part I just want to be entertained, and this movie does it.
On a quick side note Dina Meyer looks awesome in this and if all medieval water girls looked as good as her I need to find me a Delorean ASAP.
I would recommend this to anyone who likes dragon tales, medieval times movies and just good fun flicks. Definitely a family friendly picture, although there is a bit of blood in it so be warned.
Twilight Zone The Movie! It is in my honest opinion that when Hollywood decides that to revive a television series with a theatrical release hasn't really paid off in the history of the medium. Not to say that some of them haven't been at the least good. I for one think this one was a great feat. It brought back the greatness of the show and also the cheesiness that went with it. The show ended in 1964 and this film wasn't released until 1983, almost 20 years later and it was as if the show was never taken off the air. Now I wasn't even born til 13 years after the shows cancellation but I still watched it alot as a kid and it scared the crap outta me at times. Some certain episodes wouldn't even have been able to go on the air today considering how uptight the world has gotten with this politically correct bullshit.
The film is cut into 4 segments and end up being like individual episodes of the show. Each segment is directed by a different person and 2 of those people are huge names in the horror genre (John Landis and Joe Dante) and 1 has made alot of big films (Steven Spielberg) and the fourth is a sci-fi legend (George Miller). Each tale is completely different but really ooze the essence of the original show. Since all segments are done by a different guy that also means that the acting and the style of each is gonna be different. I do have my personal favorite segment and it is segment 3 and a close second is segment 4. The first 2 are still good but I find them a bit inferior to the last 2.
I think the effects are done really well. Mostly in a stop motion or practical and makeup style, which of course was the way it was done then. Computer generated effects were actually in their infancy at this time. Some films had used it already and you will understand why it wasn't widely used when I say the names of them...The Last Starfighter and Tron come to mind. Both are very good in their own right but the effects were far from good. The stop motion effects in the Twilight Zone movie are really kind of cool and bring up memories, for me at least, of Ray Harryhausen. Now if you do not know who he is then I have to say shame on you to the extreme. Go out right now and pick up a few films and those are Clash of the Titans (1981), Sinbad and the Eye of the Tiger (1977) and Jason and The Argonauts (1963). Those are just for starters. Harryhausen did the effects for those films, so what I am trying to say is without this man we wouldn't have the modern effects that everybody either loves or hates. Neat how I got sidetracked yet again!
Just check it out if you have any interest in the Twilight Zone TV series, either of them, the original that ended in 64 or the revival in 1985, which wouldn't have been possible without this film. It also has some X-files type of things going on as well so if you like that show watch it. But for anyone that looks at the cast list and wants to see a good Dan Akroyd film, this isn't it. He is in it maybe 5 minutes, but I can tell you one thing about his limited screen time and that is it's awesome.
A few years I remember a friend of mine had recommended this movie to me because he knew I enjoyed either scary movies or weird movies or a mixture of the two or just movies in general. In that he wasn't wrong. A few years have gone by and I finally got around to watching Triangle. I thought from the poster it was a film about the Bermuda Triangle and there was a killer on a boat. I couldn't have been more wrong. I mean it even starts like an old 80's slasher film. Some young 20-30 somethings all get on a sail boat to go have a good day until things go wrong and they are chased down by a maniac. That's only a part of this little known picture. Actually that's not even what it's about and you will know what I mean if you just sit down and watch it. I am right but I am so wrong at the same time.
It's acted pretty well. Melissa George is really the only one on screen at all times and she does a very good job. She does even better considering what is going on with her in the film, which I can't disclose here because it will ruin the whole thing for you. Only other known actor in this is Liam Hemsworth, but he isn't even a big character in this picture nor was he even known at the time of the films release. But while he is in it he does good. The rest of the cast also does good but Miss George is the standout, as she should be since she is the only seasoned Hollywood actress in it.
I won't talk about the special effects at all other because than they are just par for the course here. I think the writer is very talented to be able to weave such a...weird but compelling story that screams for a few consecutive watches. I say that because after the first viewing of it you are left with a ton of questions. Or at least I was so I am assuming others have as well. There are many a time during the course of the movie where you will definitely doing a bit of out loud WTFing to your TV.
I liked it and will watch it again so I would recommend it to people that enjoy some mystery and weirdness in their movies. Don't watch it on a night when you just want to have a good time and not think because you will be thinking. And also one last thing, if you must have a bathroom break at all make sure you pause it, you may come back and be totally lost.
I was on a website awhile back that was just chock full of lists about movies. Lists like top ten of the 90's or 80's, top ten films to not go on a first date to, top ten films with ridiculous characters and other weird things like those. The particular article I was reading happened to be called Top Ten Films You Will Only Watch Once or something to that effect. It was filled with films like Human Centipede, Audition and Martyrs. The Pact was one of them on this list that I had not seen prior to reading it. So, I naturally had my interest peaked.
This boils down to a haunted house story. I don't normally go for these type but I figured after watching the trailer it looked pretty good. Although this time the haunted story has been changed a bit into something else. I liked the story but it still seemed like something was missing. I can't really put my finger on it, it's just how I felt after finishing the film. But the change in the normal story line for this type of film was very much a welcome site. But, it does have a few moments that make you ask questions out loud, for instance...How do ghosts know how to use Google maps app on a smartphone? And if a ghost really needs help from the living, why is it their only way to communicate is to pick that person up and throw them around the room? I believe that really gets one thing across and that is pure and utter horror.
The acting is pretty much your average style for the genre. And by that I mean it is just that...average! It gets the point across without being distracting but it definitely wouldn't have hurt if a little more effort was put forth. It really isn't too bad, there are much worse acted films out there than this one. It's worth a look see I can tell you that.
I can also tell you that I did like this film but will most likely not watch it again unless a large span of time goes by. Not like it was bad but I am just into a different style of haunted story I guess. It really does have a few moments worth talking about but I can't talk about them for fear it would give away the story to much. Why it was on that list I read about? I'm guessing that the author didn't put it on his list because of the same reason I won't watch it again. Especially since when compared to the others on that list, this is extremely tame!
I am sorry to anyone that has been waiting for new movie reviews but I got sidetracked. See I am a huge Dr. Who fan, I have seen all of it and still can't wait for more. I recently rewatched all of David Tennants stint as the fabled Doctor because he has been my favorite of all time. There are a few of the episodes that have a secondary character other than the normal companion. That character is Captain Jack Harkness played by the very talented John Barrowman. I love his character so much in fact I watched Torchwood all the way through just for his character alone.
But now that I am fresh out of Captain Jack Harkness to watch I decided to look up the actor himself to see what else he has played in that I may be interested in. So in my IMDB search I found out he has a role in the DC comics show called Arrow. I am also a huge DC comics fan, more so than Marvel, but I will admit I have never been a even a little bit of a fan of Green Arrow. He just seemed a bit too "Robin Hood" for me. So, I guess, needless to say I never watched the show even though it has big ratings.
Now onto the reason I haven't reviewed or even watched any movies for a bit over a week. Arrow! I started it to see another great role by John Barrowman and was delighted to find a great show involving the DC extended universe. Really, what I am trying to say is I just watched both full seasons in around a week and now I can't wait for the next season to start. I also cannot wait for The Flash to start because it shows his origin in Arrow. I only have one real complaint for this show and that is the woman that plays Laurel Lance has apparently gone under the knife between the 2 seasons because in season 1 she is a very beautiful woman and in just the first episode of the second season it's almost as if they decided to hire Celine Dion to take her place. Her new chin is so distracting and it's an absolute shame that this woman was so self conscious about her looks that she went and destroyed herself. Now I hope they write her out of the show or just replace her because there is no room in this show for a chin that large. I don't mean to be mean in the least bit but actors need to really stop messing around with the looks your parents gave you. You know a fluctuation in weight is one thing but to have some doctor cut pieces off you or add new pieces is uncalled for. Anyway enough of that stuff.
That's why I haven't been on here in awhile. I would urge people to check it out if they haven't yet.
This picture has been around for 5 years now. And for 5 years people have been bashing the hell out of it. I don't know why though because I have seen it a few many times and although after the first viewing it loses about a half a step. Only reason I say that is because like all films you have watched more then once, you know the ending now so it actually changes the film a bit. It is still a great film though. The first time you watch this flick it is incredibly satisfying.
The actors all do a good job, but then again, Ben Foster has always done a good job in pretty much everything I've seen him in. Dennis Quaid does what Dennis Quaid has been doing for a few decades now and that is being awesome. There is in fact one honorable mention and that is Antje Traue. She practically steals the show, mainly because it is so hard to keep your eyes off her she is so hot. Most may remember her from the Man of Steel from last year where she played Faora and rocked that role as well. In all honesty though she could be wearing a potato sack and reciting mid 80's gangster rap and I would be 100% captivated by her.
The effects are awesome and they are practical when the camera is inside the ship but CGI when outside the ship. Both look great, but the makeup effects on the..umm..bad guys? looks fantastic. Those guys are creepy as hell and I would hate to run into them in an empty spaceship with nowhere to go or even in a giant meadow underneath a rainbow would suck too.
I love the story, although I don't know who wrote it without looking it up, which at this moment I am feeling too lazy to do. But just go into this knowing it is written well and overall story when it is all said and done is very good and way different from other sci-fi films in this particular genre. That genre being sci-fi mixed with horror.
I left this movie with a hope for more but since it had next to no marketing it kinda flopped in the U.S. box office. It really shouldn't have either because it is far better then some of the theatrical releases that bring in piles of money. I would have to say if you liked the film Event Horizon then you will most likely enjoy this. Maybe not, as I have read about a few that still dislike this one for reasons I just can't see. But I sure liked it immensely so if you trust me in my movies then give it a shot. Definitely do not watch it with your children because I guarantee they will have nightmares all week. Actually now that I think about it, some parts of this can give those same nightmares to an adult.
While I was at work today Warner Bros. decided they wanted to release the actual title of the Man of Steel sequel without talking to me first. I know you're probably saying that they don't need to ask me, well I beg to differ because they gave it a stupid ass name. I knew it was gonna be based around the first meeting of Batman and Superman, where they fight, which is stupid even in the comics to have these 2 fight because it is completely one-sided. Before all fanboys (other than me) give all their dumb reasons why Batman should win I just want to point out that Batman is HUMAN with no powers whatsoever other than he has money. Supes is an ALIEN and is naturally strengthened by our yellow sun. And I don't think old Bats is gonna snuff out the sun so he has no chance. But back to the title of this film. It is called Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice! I hate it! No movie in the history of the world has ever been really remembered with a "someone versus someone else" title. With the exception going to the many Godzilla films by Toho. I don't really mind the Dawn of Justice part but I sincerely hope Warner Bros. changes the first part. I would even prefer them to call it Man of Steel Part 2 or maybe just plain Superman or lets get crazy and call it Justice and base it off the graphic novel called...you guessed it...Justice! If DC comics has any hope in their tiny little heads to regain the title that was stolen by Marvel comics I believe a good place to start would be the title of this film. The Justice League has the potential to be so much bigger than that messed up Avengers movie (I have ton of things in my head as to why I said that) and they are starting off on a broken foot that's only been taped up while having no crutches! I know also that DC and Warner Bros. want to maximize profits on this one and let's face it...the Batman name sells. So, obviously they want it in there! But the poster they released with the name pretty much gets the point across without the words. I would seriously much rather them not make anymore Superman movies if the only way it will make money is to put Batman in it. I don't mind Bats at all, I find him cool as hell and want to see him and Supes in the same film but I don't want the film to be shitty at the same time. Warner Bros. started off strong in my eyes with the release of the Bat suit last week. They just took a giant step back with the more than stupid title.
Sometimes during the course a a person's lifetime he or she comes across a film that is so incredibly terrible that you can't quite pull yourself away from. Krull is one of those films for me! It is so bad it is absolutely awesome! There are many films like this out there. Not films like Krull mind you because this is really a one-of-a-kind gem. I mean there are a ton of "So-bad-it's-good" genre of movies. This is in my top 3. Not in any particular order but the other 2 in my top 3 are Beastmaster and Yor, The Hunter From the Future. So, before I continue, I would like to throw out there that if you haven't seen either of the previously mentioned films then stop right now and go search for them and have a great time having a marathon of crappy fun!
Starring a bunch of unknowns and a few that will eventually become famous at some point in the future, this picture is produced in a very terrible way. Not one actor so much as put in any effort to be believable in the least bit. After school specials are acted better than this. They should be nominated for Oscars over Krull. There really is only so much you can say about a film and it's absurd acting so I will stop at that point.
Some of the effects are kinda neat. 80's neat, but neat none-the-less. CGI was a thing not really used at the time so this film relies all on practical effects. I enjoy them anyway. Some are almost good but mostly they are the other end of the spectrum.
I love the story. It is a mite weird at times and hard to keep up with if you take too many bathroom breaks without using the ever helpful pause button. This has medieval stuff, space/alien stuff and fantasy all smashed together but I like it alot even though it doesn't know what it wants to be. Even though the film is as bad as I have said I do think it was written well, just delivered in the worst possible way.
I would say obviously check out this movie if you like alien invasion films, medieval films, films about cyclops', movies with flying horses, crappy choreography, sword fights and laser battles, flying castles, wizards, gigantic stop-motion spiders and fancy throwing weapons called a Glaive. Just watch it because you may like it. I would suggest you watch it before you let kids watch it because there are a few parts of increased creepiness that may give nightmares to the easily susceptible. But I will tell you that I watched this when I was maybe 7 with my father back when we would record a ton of movies off Cinemax and HBO. More than likely it was Cinemax because HBO usually deals in newer films back when there was only one HBO station. A few quick standouts for this movie are it is a very early Liam Neeson role and also Robbie Coltrane. One more before I end this, the soundtrack was done by James Horner and it is kinda spectacular.
I watched this in the theater opening weekend because I was so incredibly stoked for this! I love horror movies so it kinda seems obvious that I would go see this. There is one other obvious thing for the reader to understand, and that is this is a remake of the 1981 Sam Raimi film of almost the same name. "The" Evil Dead was the original title. Yes, a simple "The" completely changes the whole thing. Now Sam Raimi has become huge in recent years with the Tobey Maguire starring Spider-Man films. He was much better at horror.
So this remake had alot of buildup involved with it. Many different trailers were released for it. Many of those trailers were just incredibly short snippets of the trailers themselves. But, the filmmakers had a catch phrase during the credits and on most of the posters and that was "The most terrifying film you will ever experience"! I will give them one thing and that is the buildup was fantastic. Really draws you in and peaks you interest level. What I am trying to say is, I fell for it yet again with the remake of a beloved horror franchise.
I am gonna start with the good first then move through the downward spiral. There are a few computer generated effects throughout the course of the film but the practical effects completely tip the scales in terms of sheer numbers. Whichever type of effect is on screen it looks good and believable, a smidge over the top but they look great.
The acting is decent, especially when you think it is a horror movie, and we all know that horror movies have got a huge reputation for terrible acting overall. So bad in fact that I dare say Star Wars was acted well in comparison. I have never seen any actor that appears in this film before and I have only seen one of them since. But, in their defense, they all do a decent job at making you feel scared and also show the viewer that everyone has a survival instinct because let's face it we all want to live, right?
The story is similar to the original from '81, not the same so if you love the original like I do then have really low expectations for this and you should be fine. I had really high expectations and I think it ruined it for me. I was expecting a remake but instead got a remake/reimagining/sequel hybrid. I say remake because it has the name and it has a similar premise. I say reimagining because they changed an incredible amount of stuff. I say sequel because there are alot of things throughout the entire film that seem like it happened in the time of Ash. For instance I will say one thing that makes no sense in the remake/sequel continuity and that is...Why is Ash's car out back of the cabin? All rusted no less, which leads one to believe that he left it there for over 20 years. Why it makes little to no sense, you ask? His car being there means part 3 never happened because his car was sent into the void with him and landed back in time with him. So, technically his car shouldn't be there. And I guess I will ask one more question while on the subject. If this is a proper remake, then where is Ash? The filmmakers took out the best part of the original series. Or maybe they just believed that the character has become so iconic that he would be impossible to replace and Bruce Campbell is just too old now to play a 20 year old. Then again, no character has the same name as the previous entries in the series so that seems like a sequel. I do believe in all honesty I am kinda lost on the subject but I hope I've made my point clear to anyone reading this.
You should definitely check it out if you like creepy shit because that stuff comes out in droves. I wouldn't say this film is scary, mainly because I don't really find many movies scary, creepy is the best word I can use at this point to describe what happens here. I do like this film and will watch it from time to time as I just did but I would prefer the original because in my eyes if you don't have Ash, then you don't have Evil Dead. One more little thing to add...watch after the credits if you really miss Ash as much as I.
Back in 1989, in late June, I remember I was 11 and 1/2 years old. I use the 1/2 because that's what pretty much every human being does until a certain age, so as I am remembering a tale from then I will use the proper terms. My brother was about 12 and 1/2 years old at this time and you can maybe imagine two young boys in the late 80's and their love for comic books. Up until this point though there was really only the 60's Batman show, The Incredible Hulk show and the cinematic Superman Starring the late great Christopher Reeves. There were a few others but mainly not much to choose from and those we could watch were campy beyond belief. In June of '89 Batman, starring Michael Keaton as the Caped Crusader, got released into theaters across the nation. I guess I wouldn't need to say that we both were pretty excited about it.
Our older sister, who is 4 years older then me, and her friend wanted to go to the movies and so did we. We obviously wanted to see Batman but my sister being the older one, got to choose what she and her friend wanted to see. For the life of me I cannot remember the name of the film we were originally going to see but I can tell you one thing...it was nowhere near as cool as Batman. I am actually texting her right now as I type this to see if she can remember the film. It would appear the film in question will remain in question for some time.
We finish the film and I can honestly say that since then I have not had the same feeling leaving a theater. That was spectacular. Batman looked different, Joker looked different, the Batmobile looked different and it was just an awe-inspiring movie for an 11 year old. And as far as comic book films go, this is the one I compare all others to. Not Spider-Man 2 and not X-Men 2, this one. It is my belief that if this film had never been produced then neither would the two previously mentioned Marvel tales.
So onto the reason why I decided to do this post. A few days ago Zack Snyder, the director of the recent Man of Steel film, released the first picture of Ben Affleck as the new Batman that will appear in the Man of Steel sequel. Here it is...
The first thought that went through my mind was, "AWESOME"! I love it! It would also appear that I am in the minority with this one. Alot of people, the world over, have been blasting the hell outta this. With things like.."Gay, compared to Bale", and "What's with the stupid short ears?". I love it! I can't say it enough because it looks to me like Snyder and company have really made a Batman that has never been tried before. The Batman I see here is hateful and pissed off at the world for what happened to him and this is the only way he can cope with it. What I really think people are hating on is the fact that Ben Affleck is playing The Dark Knight. Man, there is alot of Ben haters out there. So, he made Daredevil, which I love that flick. I thought he did well in it, which is way more than I can say about the rest of the cast. So, he made Gigli as well. And I will say I didn't find it as terrible as everyone says. In my honest opinion I think that every single person that says they hate this film hasn't actually watched it. They just blast it because noone wants to admit they liked it. But he has proved himself a great actor and director in other movies so I don't know where all the hate is from. I mean, come on, every actor out there makes a film that even their fans don't like. This new take on The Bat looks great to me. He looks more mean and the suit looks classic but different all at the same time.
When the 1989 Batman came out pretty much everyone was pissed off that Michael Keaton was playing the title role. I was 11 so I didn't know who he really was then. But so many were upset that Mr. Mom was taking ahold of the cape. A man that was mainly in comedic ventures was supposed to be the serious and always angry blue and grey?...I mean Black and Yellow! This was the first real reinvention of Batman. He was always in blue and grey in the comics and in the '66 TV show as well. Black! With a bright yellow utility belt and an amazing yellow Bat symbol on his chest. That can spread fear into the hearts of the evil right there!
Lets not forget a few other details of this '89 Batman. One being the baddassness of the Batmobile! That was so sleek with its Bat fins on the side and the sliding cockpit door. Damn, just thinking about it makes me want to watch it right now. "Where does he get those wonderful toys?" The Joker said it best. Speaking of the Joker? Jack Nicholson took the Joker into another realm here. He was very funny and sadistic at the same time, which is a hard thing to do. He pulled it off. And he was known as the Joker for almost two decades. Everyone knows why!
In 1995, after one more Michael Keaton/Batman film, known as Batman Returns, Keaton hung up the cape for good. He was replaced by Val Kilmer, which is kinda weird to me because he has a mouth that people can notice for miles. And when that is the only human part of Bruce Wayne that is seen by everyone when his cowl is on then I say it's a no go. But this film is called Batman Forever and it almost killed the franchise. Joel Schumacher took the reigns from Tim Burton and completely changed the look and feel of the film. Most of all he brought on the Bat nipples. Yes, you read that correctly, they put nipples on the Bat Suit. Back in the day when Batman was known for just being in a comic book and a campy show he wore a fabric suit so maybe then, and only then, should we see some nipplage. Funny thing though...we didn't see them when we should and do see them when we shouldn't! Schumacher took the Dark Knight and turned him on his head with this film. He changed the suit a bit but the nipples were way too much. The car was changed too, in my eyes not for the better. The filmmakers decided the Batmobile needed...wait for it...neon lights! Ummm, hell no! Car could have been cool if it wasn't for the lights. Although this movie has one redeeming factor, and that is Jim Carrey as Riddler, that was perfect.
1997 hits and we have yet another actor taking the cape and cowl into theaters. It couldn't have been any worse if Joel Schumacher tried to make the single worst rendition of Batman ever! Oh wait a minute...he did! Called Batman & Robin and includes BatGirl, Mr. Freeze, Poison Ivy and Bane. This movie is okay to watch if you are barely paying any attention to it at all. So I suppose that means it sucks. Nipples are back but this time George Clooney wears them. Now we have an acclaimed dramatic actor taking his turn and it is not good. This is the movie that killed the franchise for close to a decade. The Bat suit in this one changes a couple times. Starts out with the Schumacher nipples and then goes to horrendous blue and silver suit. It is my belief that Joel Schumacher hates Batman! I mean he is called the Dark Knight for a reason! Dark and mysterious should be the key words. None of that is existent here! The Batmobile was destroyed as well in this one. If you squint and look at your TV at an angle while drunk this car looks cool! But if your like me, you watched it hoping for some type of cool. Didn't happen. The Batmobile is something out of a cartoon and has the added Schumacher neon lights. No wonder it took so long for Hollywood to make another Batman film.
2005 brings us a new era in Batman. People have kinda forgotten the last travesty and embraced the new look. Christopher Nolan has handled this new tale with some delicate hands. I think he knows that there are some die hard Batman fans out there but this new Batman needs something for the folks that don't read comics. Played by Christian Bale in a most serious way. The three films he portrayed the Bat are the most profitable, and I believe that would be because they made a film for more than just comic fans. These three films are set in reality, which is the difference between this and any of the other Batman films. I do like these movies immensely. But I think I may hurt someones feelings when I say the only problem with them is the lead actor. Christian Bale is a good actor and he does play the part of Bruce Wayne well, but he plays the part of Batman badly. It's the voice, man! It is so bad I have a hard time believing him. But the Batsuit is kinda cool with the armor plating. The first Bale Picture has the best Batsuit in the newer series. The two sequels gave Batman a way to turn his head and turn his head he could but that alone made the silhouette take a nasty turn. I just don't like it after the first one. The Batmobile took a drastic change, even more so than it's pilot. These films call it the Tumbler. I call it crap! It is by far the worst Batmobile ever! Again, I am alone in these thoughts. They took an incredibly sleek car and turned it into a tank! Not even a tank, but a bridgelayer vehicle. That's pretty uncool to me. This particular series has a few redeeming factors that all boil down to the villains. They always say that a hero is only as good as the villain he is against! Nolan took this to heart and gave Batman villains that were so much better then himself. For one, I will bring up Heath Ledger as the Joker! As I mentioned before, Jack Nicholson was the Joker, and I repeat...WAS...the Joker. As much as I loved Jack's Joker, I loved Heath's more! He was beyond sadistic but still funny enough to call him his rightful name. Also Bane was such a great character and acted so well by Tom Hardy. The accent was great and the change of outfit, although not close to the original character, was still pretty cool.
I am hoping that when this Man of Steel sequel hits theaters and I am able to see it that I don't eat my words. I want so bad for this film to be awesome. I am a DC fan from the start and Superman is the greatest in my opinion. But, adding the Batman in the mix for the first time is taking a huge risk, these two have never been in a live action film together! So, introducing a new actor as Batman and mixing him with Supes is huge and I think the filmmakers know how much of a risk they are taking. I don't think they would take a chance on destroying their own careers by putting Ben Affleck in the Bat role if they didn't think it would pay off. And if you look at Zack Snyder's filmography you can see that he has made a few other films that people thought would be unfilmable like 300 and Watchmen. I am firmly standing behind him with the belief that he can create the best version of The Justice League possible. I cannot wait!
I am gonna be real with everyone about this one. I liked it. No kidding. I remained glued to my TV throughout the entire picture. The actors are mostly not well known but there a couple you may have seen before like the dude from Heroes TV show. But really they are all unknowns to me for the most part. Considering that I went into this movie with expectations already in the dirt, I was surprised that I liked it as much as I did. By the title alone it would seem this was made for the Sify channel, and it could have been, I don't know for sure. Don't be fooled by what I just said, because even though I said I liked the film doesn't mean it is acted well. On the contrary, the acting is atrocious but the Mexican security guard is funny as hell. Yeah that's the shining light for this one.
The special effects are...odd...to say the least. There are a few times where the effects are almost unbearable. Although, there are a few time where they are done really well. Weird in this age of CGI to have a movie with good and terrible effects all rolled into one. It goes back in forth too. One minute it looks almost grade "A" effects, then the very next scene it looks like something worse than the worst "B" film you have ever seen. But, I still enjoyed the movie a bit.
The story...ummm? Just look at the name and the poster for the film and you could probably surmise as to the story, so it shouldn't be a shocker at all.
Go into this one with some low expectations and you will like it I think. If you go in thinking your in for an Oscar treat then you will be severely let down after the opening scene alone. Just pop some corn and have a few drinks and have a good time with a film you need no brain cells for at all. Unless your afraid of spiders! In that case be drunk and grab a pillow to cover your eyes, because like the title says...it is a Big Ass Spider!
This may seem very odd coming from me, but, until a few days ago I had never seen this flick before! I've obviously known of it because I am always interested in the Hollywood scene as a whole. I have always been a fan of everything Wayans, which makes it even more weird that I haven't watched it til recently. But it looked so dumb to me that I couldn't pull myself to watch it. There is a short story involved as to why I did.
About 6 months ago I got a new job, in a new state and in a new city. I tend to have a little fun while I am there by talking to myself in stupid voices to pass the time. One of these voices happens to be a kind of mix of chick voice or maybe a gay dude but it makes my coworkers laugh. One coworker said it was just like the voices the two Wayans brothers use for this movie. That's why I wanted to watch it. See, a short one!
I thought this movie was an absolute riot. I watched it alone and I laughed out loud during many times. The acting isn't very good and the very minimal effects aren't done very well at all either, but, this is a great film. I think the filmmakers weren't going for any Oscar performances with this one, and it shows. But what they were going for, or at least what I believe they were going for, is to make a movie that just makes people laugh. And laugh you will. I don't care who you are, there is something funny in this for every person on Earth. So, if you just want a movie to watch where you don't have to think much and just have a good time laughing, this is it.
I will warn everyone that your stomach may hurt for awhile after this one.
**WARNING**
If you have a squeamish stomach, Do not watch this film! If you have trouble with bad acting, Do not watch this film! If you have a problem with bad CGI effects, Do not watch this film! If you have a problem with gratuitous nudity, Do not watch this film! Got all of that? Now we can continue.
I love this movie! I love it for what it is. And what it is is a throwback to the 70's exploitation grindhouse movies. As I said before, this has pretty bad acting from all involved. Every single actor, even the ones you know to do a good job most of the time, are bad. And the bad actors do an awesome job being bad. So the only Oscar your gonna see here is there may be someone with that name on the crew, but I am still not sure of that.
When it comes to the practical effects, they are done really well. I mean that too as they are pretty gruesome and look cool. The CGI effects on the other hand are terrible. They are almost as if a 10 year old was doing them on his own Wal-Mart brand PC. But in their defense though they are pretty fun to watch at the same time. It was filmed specifically for 3-D and I am not the one to like that sort of thing. I believe that any film in 3-D loses alot in the process because the filmmakers purposefully throw shit at the camera. Just a stupid gimmick to me that they use to hike up the price of a movie ticket. So whether you watch this film in 3-D or not it still is just kinda fun to watch. Just don't think into it too much. Something that is not special effects but is awesome is Kelly Brook is in this movie. She can't act but damn if she isn't good to look at.
Piranha was directed by Alexandre Aja. The man behind the remake of The Hills Have Eyes and the awesome french film Haute Tension. So the man knows his way around a bit of gore. I do believe he did a good job, considering the script he had to work with and what he was trying to accomplish with it. What I believe he was trying to accomplish was to make a fun movie. Not for a dramatic story, just a movie you can watch and get lost in its absurdity. Like the way movies used to be made. I like this movie alot and have returned to it a few times just for its ridiculous nature.
I've known of this film for quite some time but for some odd reason it never struck me as something I would be interested in. What's even weirder is the fact I have a fairly long relationship with cheesy B movies. A good relationship too, mind you. But, I never saw a trailer for this until recently and that is what got me to really watch it. And watch it I did.
This film is s whole lot of fun! And I really mean it. It is a cross between Friday the 13th, Evil Dead and a really good comedy. I have no name for a comedy in this particular realm so that is what I used. The picture is basically a mistaken identity and that is all I will give you for the story.
Acting is okay. Some are really bad but in my honest opinion the two main characters, Tyler Labine, who I've never seen before and Alan Tudyk, who I only remember from the awesome Firefly series. They do play the hillbillies quite well and are the real reason for the comedy throughout the entire film. The other actors are kinda forgettable and at times just annoying but the main two are reason enough to watch this little known gem.
Directed by Eli Craig, I ain't gonna lie to you, I have never heard of him and had to look him up myself to see what else he did. And what I found out was he is known for not much at all. He did direct the T.V. version of Zombieland which I didn't see and was canceled, I believe before it even aired. But I will say that if he keeps making films in this style then I think he can have a good career. Mr. Craig also wrote the movie and it was written well because I laughed and was generally interested in it. The two main guys were very funny and believable as morons.
Anyways, give this film a chance if you like B movies or comedies or a film that makes fun of an old slasher flick. I enjoyed it immensely.
I have been gone for a few days but I am back online with another remake review. This time it is another remake of an American classic horror movie. My mistake, I always mess that up, I mean a re-imagining of an American classic.
So I won't lie about it, I do like this film immensely and not because it has anything to do with the original Dawn of The Dead that was released in 1978. But, because it brings other things to the table. And I tell you what, that zombie table is quite full. So, what does it bring to the table that is new you ask? For one it shows us that a modern day horror films can still use prosthetics instead of relying heavily on CGI like fantasy pictures do. The effects are really good but definitely don't watch it if you are a bit squeamish! Lots of head shots which is par for the course in a zombie movie. For all the rest though, even the sprinting zombies have been done before like in 28 Days Later but that is for another post entirely.
Directed by Zack Snyder and loosely based off of George Romero's original script, and I mean loosely based to the extreme. The only thing this film has in common with its predecessor is the mall and that is it. No names are the same, what the people do for a living isn't the same, the zombies obviously aren't the same, what happens through the course of the film isn't the same and the outcome isn't the same. So like I said, only the mall. I will never, ever understand why Hollywood feels the need to change all aspects of a movie that was damn awesome to begin with! I mean, really if you want to make a film that was already made by someone else two and a half decades ago and you feel you can make it better then I am all for it! But what I have a problem with is when they decide "I want to remake Dawn of The Dead, but want to make it completely not like the other one". So what they are really saying is they want to make a new film but give it the other films name to capitalize on the title alone. That's really some kind of cheap!
Don't let that previous statement throw you off because this is a good film. The acting is the same as you would find in any other film on the same subject. I enjoy this movie to the maximum and would honestly recommend it to anyone that likes zombie type things. I have to say one last thing in an honorable mention type of way, and that is this picture has a really odd but very good soundtrack to it. Some real great choices thrown in to make it just a little different from the pack. For instance I will throw 2 picks out for you right now. What kind of zombie film starts with Johnny Cash and has Richard Cheese's remake of Disturbed's The Sickness? An awesome one!
I really can't believe this film came out a decade ago now. I was living in California at the time when it was released and had quite a build up to it with the trailers and such. I really could not wait for it. It seemed like we finally had a new and original story for a horror flick.
So the story goes like this...no I'm just kidding, I told you I wasn't gonna give a synopsis of any film so I am gonna stand by that. Unless you want me to, in which case just sound off in the comments section below. I would have to change my whole strategy then. The original story part I mentioned is that this film's about a serial killer that doesn't kill people. That's all you get.
The acting is passable at times and then just freakin terrible at other times. There are no true standouts as everyone involved does a good scene and a bad one right after or vice versa. But in its defense though, horror movies are not known for their acting. Scary movies aren't even known for it. With the very few like The Silence of The Lambs being the obvious difference.
The Saw films have gotten a reputation of being the beginners of the "Torture Porn" genre of films. Sad to say that but it is true. Even sadder is it wasn't until part 3 where we get that style of film. The first one is a first rate thriller with a good and different story that shows minimal amounts of blood and gore. It is my favorite of the series by far and the only one to live up to the hype. From part 2 and onto part 7 I believe the filmmakers lost their way in a very extreme way. Instead of the stories having an actual story they decided to see just how much gore they could put into each sequel in an attempt to raise the "Gore Bar"! The director of the first, James Wan, did a great job and then jumped ship and went on to make some other very interesting horror films. I kinda wish he stayed on with Saw so we could have had it done the proper way. But if he stayed we wouldn't have Dead Silence, Insidious or The Conjuring. He appears to have a thing for dolls! But he had one thing right with them, dolls are freakin creepy!
If you are in the market for some Saw films I would suggest stopping after part 1. The sequels add some interesting back story but if you have a weak stomach you may want to skip them. But first is, like I said, a first rate thriller and shouldn't be missed by any lover of horror.
I do enjoy, for the most part, all comic book movies for some reason or another. Some I like way more then the next one and some I dislike even more but I still can find some redeeming factor in all of them. So that being said I suppose I will chat about the second installment of the Amazing Spider-man.
Every actor in this film does, at the very least, a decent job. I thought at first that the choice to make Jamie Foxx play Electro was an odd choice. Not for his acting talents because he has proven he has the chops in his repertoire, but for the reason that Electro has always been a white character. I am not racist in the least bit but I have been reading comic books since I could read and when these films are made after stories I read I just want them to stay true to the story and that includes a persons color. This is where all jump in my business and say I am either racist (even though I just said I wasn't) or they tell me to forget about the source material! I am sorry because I cannot forget the source material and the reason is that the source material is what made me and millions like me fall in love with these characters. Now that that has been said, I have to say that Mr. Foxx was absolutely perfect in the role! He knocked it out of the park, great job indeed. Andrew Garfield as the title character does a great job as well. If you were to ask me I would say he is the best choice right now for Peter Parker, he has the correct build and just looks the part. There is one standout that I will mention and that is Dane Dehaan! He does a fantastic job as Harry Osborn and the Green Goblin. He reminds me of a young Brad Pitt or maybe Leonardo Dicaprio. Fine job, he should have a very long career if he keeps this up.
Story is written well, even for one containing 3 villains. Miles ahead of Spider-man 3 anyways but that doesn't take much. It is a good story about love, teenage life and the most important one, truth. Truth about his family and what happened to them. Regardless of what the critics say the story works in the universe created. I have one big problem with the writing and that is the ending of the film. How can they be writing this huge action scene and think it was okay to just end the film in the middle of a battle? That was so not cool. I understand you want to make a story that can be made into multiple movies but I believe every film, no matter if it is a part 2 or 3, must have a beginning, a climax and an ending that at least ends that little part of the story. In this day and age of film it is not a guarantee that you will make another sequel.
Special effects for this kind of film are 99% CGI and are pretty good for the most part. There are a few times in it that Spidey looks like he is completely breaking the laws of physics but I find it entertaining as hell to watch so I am okay with it. Very cool fights scenes throughout the picture and Electro looks like one of the coolest CGI characters I have seen in a long while.
Overall I would say check it out for the comic book nerd inside all of us. Just be warned of the surprise ending. Not like a twist in the ending either, I mean the ending that just surprises you when it shows up.
I knew nothing of this film before watching it other then I know the city it is named after is destroyed by a volcano. So, I naturally think to myself that I know the ending. Kinda like watching Titanic, I don't care who you are, you know the gist of the story.
I will start by saying there is a large all-star cast in this led by Kit Harington, Emily Browning and Jack Bauer. Some do pretty okay and some do incredibly bad. Joe Pingue is so terrible that I was shocked to read he had so many acting credits. He is just bad, no other words describe it. And it saddens me to say that one of the worst ones is Jack Bauer, pretty upsetting to say the least. I add one simple question to this section. This film takes place in Italy, a place where Italian should be the language. Why do film makers think that if you have to make the movie into English because Americans refuse to read subtitles, how is it an English-ish accent take its place? It makes no sense and this isn't the only film to do it. All do it when they need English words but have it take place in a none English speaking country. Very not cool in my eyes!
A very pretty movie though. Great effects throughout for the most part. I would have to say that 90% of the effect are damn good. The eruption itself kinda takes place in the background but looks wicked cool when it is on screen.
This picture is a meld of a few different films. It has a Romeo and Juliet thing going on, a Gladiator thing going on and a Titanic/Disaster movie thing going on. It really is just Titanic with the ship taken out and replaced by Mount Vesuvius but it still has bit parts of the others thrown in for good measure.
I enjoyed it a little bit but just the fact as I knew the outcome it takes alot away from the dramatic pieces so this may have an effect on all who watch it. So, unless you have been living under a rock and never heard the story of one of the most infamous volcano eruptions in history then you may enjoy it just that much more because you don't already know the ending.
I am not gonna waste much time with this piece of...Gem...that's what I meant to say, Gem. For mere production values it gets a score of absolutely nothing. This film is really not very good from start to finish. Not one actor in it seems like they are actually trying so everyone just phones in their performances. There is a few actual great actors but if you were to base their careers on this one movie then these fellas would be poorer then I. One stand out exceptionally bad one is Miranda Otto, she really cannot act at any level and shouldn't even be put in a high school play. On the other hand we have Yvonne Strahovski who can't really act either but I can say this, she could be wearing a trash bag reciting gangster rap and I would watch her all day. I know, I know, double standards!
Special effects are just that, special! Some are decent but most are just terrible as to being an embarrassment to special effects technicians everywhere. The way I see it is if the techs you hired on to work the movie magic can't actually do the work at hand then time to let them go. Not just give a dog a bone and allow them to destroy the one aspect of a bad film that may have saved it.
So the story goes like this...if you want to make an Underworld film then just make it. Don't just change a couple things around and and give it a name that will lie to the public into thinking it has to do with one of films greatest characters! Which brings me to why is the Frankenstein Monster even in it? I understand it is from a comic book, so you can't blame the filmmakers for that but lets look at it this way. You have a crappy story of gargoyles versus vampires and you know it won't sell at all because it is gargoyles versus vampires. So how do you fix that? Add in a character that has already proven to be a beloved and money making character obviously. Then you commence to making just a bad film about gargoyles versus vampires with a guy that has a scar on his face that's supposed to be the likes of Boris Karloff!
You should probably skip this one as it's not even a popcorn flick at any rate. But, that's up to you.
