c_p_c Reviews

Trick 'r Treat (2007)

Scores big on atmosphere, but lacking in story development.

[5/10 · 3 October 2009]

This film has been at the top of many "To See" lists for the past few years, including mine. It appeared with a rockin' trailer, but also with the stigma that no studio would release it. Word from the festivals was positive, but many of us were waiting on pins and needles to see it for ourselves. Verdicts will be coming in over the week and it will be interesting to see people's reactions to the film.

There is no doubt Dougherty has created an atmospheric ode to Halloween. The film is visually astounding and reeks of Halloween in every sense: the costumes, sets with smog and more jack-o-lanterns than you can count. The film's score, provided by Douglas Pipes, is eerily fun and provides a fantastic supplement to the mood Dougherty has created with all his visual elements. It should be an addition to any collection of film scores. The film is worth a look for these reasons alone.

The acting is on par with what the film demanded. The film has no star, and each actor or actress is only featured for a relatively short time. In that respect, each performer handled their material aptly.

However, where the film suffers is not from the story subjects, but their execution. The stingy 82 minute runtime is the crippling factor. The film's mythology supposes there are rules that must be followed during Halloween to survive the night. They are not all explicitly stated, and to be honest, I only can recall two of them: Always keep a jack-lantern lit for safety from the spirit world, and check your candy. Each story revolves around characters who break these rules and are punished by the child-like, pumpkin-headed "spirit of Halloween." This is a fine setup for a horror film, and indeed, Dougherty had great ideas, but they are not fully developed in the final product thanks to the film's length. Dougherty attempts to stuff too many elements into the film's hour and 20 minutes. As such, characters are never fully understood, the script's organization is sloppy and while some tales are more fleshed out than others, every tale leaves the viewer wanting and expecting more. Although Dougherty concludes each story, the viewer is left with a good handful of questions that seem key to buying into all the events that occurred. An extra 20 minutes would have filled in these gaps and made the film one to remember. Although we may never know, I would be curious to find out if there was more story left on the cutting room floor.

It is clear to me why this film never got a theatrical release. The overall story is just not strong enough. Without the viral and internet marketing accumulating over the years, this film would not have a wide appeal, and likely been a box office disaster. I must give credit to Dougherty for trying to put something different and original out there, and in many ways he succeeded. However, the film falls short in telling its stories, which makes everything else just sweetener at the bottom of an empty glass.

A creative, atmospheric, and original film that ultimately cuts itself short due to underdevelopment of its stories, I give "Trick 'r Treat" a 5/10.

Whiteout (2009)

About as fun as frostbite and as good as a snowcone mid-winter.

[2/10 · 24 September 2009]

"Whiteout" was dead on arrival. Word has it that this movie has been sitting on a studio shelf for some time now. This usually isn't a good sign and while some films that have delayed releases turn out to be good, Whiteout is not.

The problem with Whiteout is not the acting or the direction, but with the awful script and tired storyline. There is not one thing here that is new or original. A "killer-on-the-loose" story needs twists, revelations, and the one's given in Whiteout are solely lacking creativity. Many will guess who is pulling the strings before the first act is up. Second, the story is boring and uneventful. Save a few chases scored to pounding music, not much happens. The film tries to establish a sense of urgency with an oncoming intense snow storm. This element does little to add to the story aside from a need to get off the continent.

Whiteout is truly a celebration of mediocrity that fails on all accounts. At the time this was supposedly filmed, Beckinsale was probably still trying to cement herself as a star in Hollywood. It makes sense that she took the role. However, and for her benefit, she has done far better since. That makes this film seem even more out of place.

Don't waste your time or money. Don't waste a DVD rental. Whiteout just isn't worth it.

Jennifer's Body (2009)

A worthy film not deserving of all the hate.

[7/10 · 23 September 2009]

It has been some time since I've written a review on this site, but I felt this movie and its current underwhelming performance at the box office warrants some good press. "Jennifer's Body" is a very entertaining film, and is sure to be one that many discover in its DVD release, which according to interviews, director Karyn Kusama has material she is anxious to release.

Make no mistake, JB isn't an Oscar contender, then again, it's not trying to be. It is attempting to throw the viewer into a world of heightened teenage brutality, and in that it succeeded. Diablo Cody, who seems to draw a love her/hate her reaction from audiences, writes a script that perhaps has one too many pop culture references or quirky word choices. But, that is Cody's world. Why say someone is good looking when you can say they're "salty?" It may not make a whole lot of sense, but Cody captures "teen speak" in her dialogue and it is a lot of fun to watch her characters say such unusual things with such ease and normalcy. Cody's writing is what separates this film from other "evil-teen" horror films. Also impressive is when Cody is able to create some genuinely sincere moments between the characters amid the violence and chaos occurring.

This film does not apologize for its odd premise nor does it try to compensate for it. JB plays it straight, recognizing the plot is entirely superficial. This premise doesn't hold the film back. The plot throws enough fun details in the mix that drive this film forward, making it a fantastic platform for the starts of the film, obviously the cast and Cody's writing.

About the cast: As Jennifer, Megan Fox is quite great! Not only does she have the looks to support her character, she creates a girl you love to hate. Jennifer is the ultimate high school goddess, but underneath the sexy exterior and projected confidence lies a tortured soul...physically personified by the demon within her. Fox is sexy when she needs to be, but wrecked when it calls for it. One short scene has possessed Jennifer, disgusted with herself, smearing makeup across her face in a very desperate fashion, desperate to hide her insecurities from the world. It is an impacting moment. Fox is another love/hate personality these days who draws just as much backlash as praise. Say what you want about her prior efforts, but Megan took charge of her character and was creative with her.

Amanda Seyfried stood against Fox well. Naturally, Fox is a force to be reckon with these days and Amanda, playing the gawky, nice girl who hides her beauty, holds her own. The girl can act, and also creates a very sympathetic and relatable character. She manages to create some very humorous moments while being natural. Her admiration for Jennifer is quite clear and Seyfried manages to capture it nicely, without making the character seem obsessive.

The guys in the cast, most who are present so Jennifer can have a meal, are each unique. Props to Kyle Gallner who disappears in his emo-goth role. I had only seen him in the bland "Haunting in Connecticut." Adam Brody, who plays the lead singer of the band that sacrifices Jennifer, had a lot of fun with his role. He creates a character that is so selfish and evil, but seems like a guy who would be fun to have drinks with...if you knew he didn't want to kill you.

Finally, Kusama's direction is swift and competent. She captures the film well not overusing horror techniques and keeping the look of the film fresh. The film's soundtrack is also offbeat and unusual for the genre, but is filled with some great music. The song sung by Brody's band, "Through the Trees," has a great rhythm and lyrics. It's the sort of song that if actually released would undoubtedly be a chart topper.

Is JB the best film you will see all year? No. Is it the worst as many have been claiming? Not by a long shot. JB is different. It's star has been the center of a media obsession. JB is taking the brunt end of this. Behind the harsh criticisms of reviewers who seem to be shifting their disappointment lies a very entertaining and well-made film, despite its subject matter being quite superficial. Forget what you've heard against it, forget what you were expecting. If you like horror, Cody's style, clever films, character films or any combination of the above go see Jennifer's Body. This film deserves a better box office. I for one would like to see more films like this made, and that will only happen if people go see them. Make it happen ya'll.

Four Christmases (2008)

Has about as much Christmas spirit as a Friday the 13th film - although the horny characters are still present.

[2/10 · 8 December 2008]

It's been a while since Hollywood gave us a genuinely good Christmas movie worth seeing. If you notice, the Christmas TV line-up is the same each year and the most modern film usually on the list is THE SANTA CLAUSE (1993). This just goes to show that, sadly, Hollywood isn't creating Christmas classics as it once did. Perhaps one of these years we will get a Christmas film reminiscent of the ones we love to watch on TV every year, but this ain't that year - or at least FOUR CHRISTMASES isn't that film.

The problem doesn't lie within the film's premise, but in the actual events that play out in the film. Kate and Brad live life with and for each other and that's it. They don't have much contact with their families - where each parent is divorced and some remarried - and each Christmas opt for a tropical vacation, telling their families they are doing charity work instead. All in all, they are happy with each other, but have buried their family issues. However, this year they get caught in their lie and are forced to visit each parent individually, celebrating a total of four Christmases. In the hands of an able and creative script writer this film could have been quite enjoyable as both Kate and Brad learn to appreciate their families and not exclude certain things - mainly marriage and children - in their lives just because their parents are bad examples of them. Instead, each visit with a parent seems to be a drawn out slapstick or sex joke and nothing else and is just not in any way funny or clever.

The film suffers from a lack of intelligence and it is shocking that it attracted the star power it did. The star's talents are hardly used and instead the film opts for over-sexed relatives, ultra violent brothers and insanely disobedient children - who get no reprimanding for their actions. As a genre of film that almost lends itself to families this one missed the mark and is not recommended for the kids. As an adult-geared Christmas film it just isn't funny. Adult humor can be funny and appropriate if there is other substance backing up the film - see 'KNOCKED UP' or 'FORGETTING SARAH MARSHALL.' All we are offered in FOUR CHRISTMASES is one boring and uninspired vignette after the next with paper-thin character development and uninteresting characters.

With rarely an enjoyable moment and an atmosphere that provides almost no Christmas spirit, FOUR CHRISTMASES shouldn't be on anyone's list of holiday films. It is the awkward gift given by a relative. You know the type. It comes in a pretty package, but upon opening you find that it is a pair of underwear or a sweater that is designed to sit at the back of closets. This film surely will.

Wanted (2008)

Not a bit of substance...but, who cares?

[7/10 · 8 December 2008]

Putting it bluntly, 'WANTED' was a rather formulaic and predictable outing. A loserly, office shut-in with the help of a hot babe learns about his past and is suddenly thrust into the world of assassination, a world of flipping cars, extreme gun fights, and mind-altering stunts, thus shedding every bit of his shy, weak self. This we've all seen before.

Where 'WANTED' stands apart from any other action film I've seen is in its style. The director has upped the ante on how the action is portrayed. Gone are any sort of boundaries. This is a world where people can flawlessly flip cars over others and land perfectly upright on the other side, where people can shoot from miles away hitting nothing but their target, where people can put such a curve on bullets that they hit multiple targets standing on different planes all with one shot. If people can really do this, perhaps I'm living the same existence as Wesley, and I'm missing out. The film's major selling point is its style and its worth a viewing simply for that.

The A-List cast delivers solid performances, but the script they are given - with the exception of the last line uttered in the film - is mostly generic. James McAvoy is sympathetic and relatable as the guy who is overwhelmingly bored with his life but doesn't know how to change it - something many people understand. His transformation into tough guy is effortless and convincing. Angelina Jolie is Fox - a name quite fitting as Jolie looks fantastic; however, we've seen this character on her before. Still, she does it well. Freeman, as usual, injects intelligence into his role, playing the solemn leader of The Fraternity.

However, for all the edgy extreme events the film contains, the film is hurt by some pieces that are just plain odd and are never fully explained. For one, The Fraternity gets their targets from a secret code that is woven into tapestries by The Loom of Fate. Sounding like something from a Monty Python sketch, it is never revealed who - if anyone - controls the loom or where it derives its powers. Names are simply revealed through code and the members of The Fraternity don't ask questions. The members of The Fraternity are fully human, but seemingly invincible thanks to some sort of special wax bath devised to heal wounds very quickly. It's the film's easy out that allows them to deliver the goods on all the high-octane action they desire. Lastly, the film turns a very predictable corner that many will see coming from miles away.

When the film ends you will realize how simple it is and how ridiculous it is about 75% of the time, but you won't care. The film makes up for every flaw by smearing the screen with mind-bending stunts, unique filmography, and breathtaking visuals - yes, Ms. Jolie is one of them. It will be painfully obvious that all the simple plot details were just the framework and the real substance of the film lies not in its intricate story, but in the execution of its stunts and action. 7/10.

Dan in Real Life (I) (2007)

A refreshing, well-done family comedy

[7/10 · 28 October 2007]

In an age where more and more family members don't speak and relationships are continually strained, "Dan in Real Life" appears as an oasis out in the desert.

Nowadays, Hollywood seems infatuated with displaying families that have unhappiness at their core. Families who bite at each other, where adults set little boundaries for children and mom and dad do nothing but break each other down. It is typically only in 'kids' movies' where a strong family dynamic is presented. For those of us who don't see too many of those; however, the Hollywood rendition of the American family is rather defeating.

Dan's (Carell) family is not the typical Hollywood clan. They are a group of decidedly normal people who all have a love and appreciation for each other. They spend time doing crossword puzzle competitions and having family talent shows. The activities they do are silly, but the group enjoys each minute together.

They are also very accepting and inviting of Annie (Binoche), their youngest son's (Cook) new girlfriend. They also get excited when widower Dan shares that he, earlier in the morning, met a woman, Marie, with whom a shared a connection. Turns out Dan's woman and his brother's girlfriend are one-in-the-same. Thus presents the driving action of DIRL, as Dan and Ann-Marie work through the apparent problem amidst the family gathering.

DIRL is charming. It doesn't try to be anything else but a feel good romantic comedy infused with some important lessons and values. Carell is the perfect choice for the role of Dan. He is endearing and his average Joe persona works well here. Binoche, beautiful as ever, is both eloquent and energetic. Cook, who seemed an odd casting choice, creates a likable and loyal brother character, making it more difficult for Dan to sweep Marie away from him. Other family members, who receive less screen time, mix well together and create this contagious family environment. In a much smaller role, Emily Blunt delivers a quirky performance as a childhood friend, now grown up, and single.

DIRL isn't profound, but its optimism is contagious. Unlike other family-centered comedies that have come out over the past few years (The Family Stone & Meet the Fockers to name a few) DIRL doesn't wade in political agenda or filthy humor. It's a smart, well-written comedy that 's got lots of laughs and a lot of heart. Hopefully, we'll see more films like this.

Grindhouse (2007)

Two parts amazing, One part lame

[7/10 · 26 April 2007]

Moviegoers are always looking for something different--especially in an age of remakes and sequels--and when it came out that Robert Rodriguez and Quentin Tarrantino were working together on a throw-back double feature which would capture the feeling of grindhouse cinema people were curious, especially fans of the two directors.

Although it will be considered a flop and future projects of this type may be put on hold or axed, "Grindhouse" starts strong with tons of attitude but seems to come to a dead stop about two-thirds the way through.

The film's opener, "Planet Terror" is by far the superior film. It's a simple horror film that has an abundance of atmosphere, multi-dimensional characters and a quick, thrilling pace. Everything is over-the-top, but it's in this completely gritty and unrealistic world that's where all the fun lies. It plays with the audience's expectations and delivers an experience that demands attention.

An unusual but welcomed addition to the film is the inclusion of faux film trailers. Each trailer mocks a convention of the horror genre with hilarious and, often, repulsing results. Some are a bit self-indulgent, but in the context of the film do add to the grindhouse motif.

It is Tarantino's submission, "Death Proof" that brings the film to a dead halt. Tarantino has become far too comfortable in his own success and is at the point where he feels he can do no wrong. This film proves otherwise. From start to finish, "Death Proof" is a bore, lacking the flavorful dialogue and witty situations Tarantino's films usually contain. We are given about 15 minutes of senseless car chasing to combat the 45 minutes of girl talk, which might have well been written by a sorority girl. It doesn't help his film that it also follows about 2 hours of in-your-face action and violence. Tarantino should have rethought his portion of the film.

For whatever reason "Grindhouse" as a whole flopped (its not wholly Tarantino's film). Perhaps it was the Good Friday release or the fact that a good portion of the film's targeted audience is too young to buy a ticket to an Rated R film on their own or that the generation that once enjoyed these romps has grown out of it. However, this film, or at least the first two hours are entirely entertaining. You may choose to watch Tarantino's effort, but Rodriguez's film as well as the off-the-wall trailers are complete enough to enjoy on their own. It's a shame that something this different didn't do well, as it will discourage future attempts.

As it stands, "Grindhouse" rates a 7 out of 10.

Vacancy (2007)

Vacancy just doesn't capture what it could have.

[5/10 · 24 April 2007]

Supposedly their actual existence is debatable, but snuff films could be reduced to urban legend status. Still, this world has some dark corners, so I wouldn't put it out of mind completely. Nevertheless, the idea of people getting pleasure from filming live murders and torture is frightening. However, as much as it could be, 'Vacancy' is not.

The idea for this film is not fully realized and instead it's reduced to a cat and mouse chase that becomes all to predictable. Beyond the initial viewing of the snuff tapes (left intentionally in the room by the manager), which is probably the film's most intense scene, the couple runs from room to room as they attempt to get away, which the film makes too easy for them at times.

The real issue lies with the lack of details in the workings of the villains and motel. It appears we have three men who do nothing more than check people into a room and kill them soon after. They do very little to toy with their minds. No mystery about the villains exists. The hotel manager is the only one afforded any time for development and it is all far too superficial. What is needed is some more for the villains to do. I doubt that after doing this for as long as they have, their methods would be as primitive and mundane as displayed here.

The always beautiful Beckinsale and seemingly aloof Wilson, who manages to sidestep his usual goof-ball role, do what they can with what they are given. Aside from an opening scene where they lay out the status of their marriage, they are given very little time for further development--outside of the typical "I love you now that we have been through something awful." All in all, a very mediocre film that could have been so much more with a reworking. Also, if you do see this film, see if you can spot the moment when the script writers had no other ideas on where to go next. It's obvious.

The Gathering (2002)

A concept that deserved a better movie.

[3/10 · 15 February 2007]

This film is a perfect example of a great concept stuck in a very sedated and mediocre film. What could have been a very engaging, thrilling, possibly cult status film, is nothing more than an hour and a half of slow pacing and uninspired events.

Filled with clichés from start to finish, this film just never catches on and becomes far to predictable. Sadly, the ideas conveyed through the film and the overall concept are not done justice by the filmmakers. The film is just not that interesting.

Ricci has seen far better days and, especially with her Indie popularity at this time, I am surprised she took this role. Ricci's almost forced acting gives the idea that she wanted off the set as soon as possible. She has done much better. As for the other actors/actresses, there is nothing remarkable or even worth noting.

Its too bad. This film could have been so much more and its sad that the concept was wasted on this film. Maybe, somewhere down the road, it will come up again in a film, but in a film that is far more engaging and intelligent. I wouldn't mind.

Charlie and the Chocolate Factory (2005)

Burton cooks up a winner

[7/10 · 16 July 2005]

I was never doubtful of Burton's capability to pull together this movie. The book's satirical and playful twistedness fits right into Burton's M.O. It is quite evident that Burton had a vision is his mind for this film and for the most part he delivers a fun and satisfying film that serves for great escapism, even though we have seen most of the content before in the original.

While we've heard the story before and know exactly what happens to each character, it is still fun to get a tour of Wonka's factory through Burton's vision. The set crew has crafted some visually astounding sets from the Bucket's home to the colorful factory. Scenes that we will recall from the original, such as the boat ride, are more fun and exciting to watch. The original was very solemn, but here things are pretty fast paced.

With the exception of Depp playing Wonka, all the actors/actresses are duplicating the roles of the characters in the original. Each child plays up their signature bad character trait and Freddie Highmore is perfect as Charlie. Helena Bonham Carter is always a delight in Burton's films and does well here as Charlie's mother. It is Depp's performance that is significantly different from his counterpart. I consider Depp to be one of the best character actors in Hollywood at this time. He adapts well and commits to his characters. However, I found his Wonka at times a bit off. Depp opted to go for the same sarcastic oddity we found with Wilder's Wonka, but he also decided to be more childish and "punky" for a lack of better terms. His character is humorous for a bit, but the act gets old after a while. Nevertheless, it by no means ruins the movie and some people will probably really like the character.

Thankfully, the lamentful singing is replaced by the eccentric Oompa Loompa musical numbers. Each number is different and completely funny to watch.

Lastly, what is also fun about this film is that you can see glimpses of Burton's other films on display here. The opening credits, which consist of a tour through Wonka's odd chocolate bar assembly line reminded me a lot of the cookie maker machine in EDWARD SCISSORHANDS. Also, the Bucket's house looks like it was directly lifted out of BIG FISH with its odd slant. Just a few things Burton added in to bring together his style.

In the end, CHARLIE AND THE CHOCOLATE FACTORY's plot is reused from the original, but what else did you expect. A few things have been changed to follow more closely to the book. While Depp's performance is somewhat off, it certainly is not disastrous to the film in any way. The film is fun, colorful and entertaining. I give it a 7/10.

Hide and Seek (2005)

More like Peek-A-Boo!!!

[2/10 · 6 February 2005]

As fun as the children's game is, this movie is a severe disappointment falling in the ranks of repetitive horror. There is nothing new here.

Here "The Shining" meets the awful "Cold Creek Manor," without the first's originality. A burnt out psychologist and his daughter move to start anew after the death of his/her wife/mother. What do you know, creepy things begin to happen and Dakota Fanning turns psycho on us. The horror in this movie is amateur and I don't mean from a visual standpoint, it just isn't anything scary beyond creaking doors and words written on walls in morbid handwriting.

Aside from a recycled plot that really never changes from film to film, "Hide and Seek" suffers from choppy storytelling where we, the viewers, know stuff is intentionally being left out until the big finish, which is really not all that big. Movies that have a twist are always more fun if after the twist is revealed, you can look back and to what was shown to you and pick out the clues. "Hide and Seek" delivers bits of information and fills them in during a montage in the end. This could be forgivable if the end twist was anything close to interesting. Viewers with the slightest bit of experience with these sorts of films will see it coming from a mile away. In the end, "Hide and Seek" leaves a void that should have been filled far earlier.

Robert DeNiro's second horror offering in less than a year is a huge disappointment. Throw in Elisabeth Shue, Famke Janssen and Dakota Fanning and you would think you're in line for a decent film. But, the January release should tip you off. "Hide and Seek" recycles an old horror cliché, offers nothing new and has a twist spot-able from a mile away, this is one round I wish I sat out on.

Meet the Fockers (2004)

Charming, but you could play Battleship with all the hits and misses in this film

[6/10 · 22 January 2005]

MEET THE PARENTS had to be one of the top comedies of 2000. Now, four years later the tables have turned as we "meet the Fockers." The humor has lowered a bit as we mostly are thrown sex joke after sex joke; however, the film is still enjoyable.

Sequels like this only work if you liked the first round. Anyone who didn't like PARENTS will not find this endeavor any more appealing; however, fans of the original will most likely enjoy this offering.

DeNiro is still the hard and ultra-serious character who does not find the Focker's particularly amusing. Stiller once again tries to impress Jack, but his immature plans only backfire. Danner is again funny as Pam's spacey mother who follows Jack but wishes he would lighten up. Polo is always present, but not as utilized as she was in the original. It's the addition of Hoffman and Streisand that give this film the charm it needs to stay afloat. The on screen energy the two show is addicting and it's great to see two people who really do love each other and are not afraid to show it, albeit, somewhat inappropriately at times. They are where the fun is at.

FOCKERS at times tries a little too hard to be funny and at others hits the nail right on the head. For the most part the film balances hits and misses and does not disappoint, although this is definitely not the original. However, it is great to see these two spectrum end different families collide and come together.

Overall, a charming effort, but one that will always live in the shadows of its predecessor, MEET THE FOCKERS rates a 6/10.

White Noise (I) (2005)

Mostly static

[3/10 · 16 January 2005]

The deceased are contacting us through radio and TV waves. Some believe it and study it, others dismiss it as hoax. Wherever you stand on this phenomena, you cannot deny that it is a creepy concept and could make for creepy movie. Unfortunately "White Noise" is not that movie.

I wanted to like this movie and after seeing the terrifying trailer I thought there was a chance it would be good. Here's yet another example where the trailer makes the film look better than it is. It all faults in the story and logic. When I say logic, I don't mean the concept of the story. Whether EVP exists or not, I can believe it does for the sake of the film. The script tries to rush past the obligatory "showing the life of the main character before the tragic event" part. Usually I would not mind, but it is done so blandly and clichéd that it doesn't serve its purpose to create a believable character. Jonathan's (KEATON) reactions to what is happening do not seem real and are used to give way to his other actions. The script decides to forgo the skepticism that most people inexperienced with the supernatural would feel when introduced to something like this. Jonathan hears a voice on the computer and proceeds to set-up his own fancy ghost recording center. He doesn't even question what it is he's listening to. The concept of EVP also takes a very disappointing turn when we find out who the 'ghosts' really are.

The movie has some tense moments, but they are few and predictable. The kind that are accompanied by silence and then a sudden jolt in noise while something happens on screen. This movie had a great opportunity to deliver some real scares and failed on the grand scale. Most disappointing was the lame and preposterous ending. I'll save the revelation for the discussion boards, but it seemed that the script writers did not know how to finish the film and came up with the easiest thing possible...in the same fashion "The Forgotten" (2004) did.

All in all a lame take on something that is really scary. Had this movie been done correctly it could have sparked a fear of the radios and TV's we love, cause whether you believe in the concept or not, the notion of it is unsettling. On the other hand, WHITE NOISE rates a 3/10.

King Arthur (2004)

King Arthur Can Claim Better

[5/10 · 7 July 2004]

There is no doubt that King Arthur is a very much known character in our culture today. His story has spawned movies, a vast array of literature, and he has become an icon for the dark ages. Thus, it is no surprise that his story has been taken again to the cutting room floor and posted for summer viewing; however, this time with a different twist.

The filmakers, through advertising and a brief paragraph that precedes the movie, are pushing their movie as the true story of King Arthur (or at least as true from what we know today). Whether this claim is true or not, the legendary King Arthur has been seen in better days.

This is not because the premise of the movie is bad. The attempt to make the film have a real and authentic feel as opposed to a fantasy feel was done decently well. We have the commoners fighting for their land, the noble knights, and the savage Saxons. However, what is missing is a little more plot depth and a more engaging development of the premise.

The movie finds Arthur's knights about to depart to their homes until a final task comes for them, to save a family from the Saxons. Fromt there the movie rocks back and forth between the marching knights and the marching Saxons, with a little conversation.

As far as the characters go, they appear rather two-dimensional and dense. Only one of the knights seemed to have a real personality, and it was not King Arthur. Keira Knightley, although not great, did help give a variety being the only female in the movie with more than two lines. Although none of the acting is bad, I would have liked to see more personality behind the characters.

In all, KING ARTHUR is not a total loss. There are some fast-paced battle scenes, and it seems the filmakers put out a good effort to make something out of this film. With just a little more personality, and a quicker pace KING ARTHUR could have been great; however, as it stands I give it a 5/10.

Johnson Family Vacation (2004)

They Got the Family, But Where's the Vacation?

[3/10 · 22 April 2004]

We all remember how much we loved NATIONAL LAMPOON'S VACATION. The movie has tested popular through the past few decades and garnered much success. So it would only make sense that Hollywood would fund another film of the sorts, enter JOHNSON FAMILY VACATION.

This film tries hard, but just cannot reach the point or the hilarity that made VACATION so fun. There is just to much similarity and no originality, we have seen all the material before. The film just has no real attention grabber and the humor is too wasted or just not funny.

It is obvious that none of the actors took this film seriously as none of them give off any performance that will help them in the future. While Bow Wow is the only one that has some onscreen charisma, he is just a laughably bad actor and should stick to music. Leading the cast, Cedric the Entertainer becomes too much like Chevy Chase's father role. Vanessa Williams and Knowles really do not stand out and just blend into their stereotypes. Shannon Elizabeth, while not an actress known for her on screen brilliance is wasted in her part and seems to only be there to garner star attention.

Although this film fails to deliver an original take on the vacation movie rather than a rehash of what we've seen, I would like to point out as a positive that it stayed true to the title and, for the most part, kept the "family" in the "vacation." While not without its moral flaws, it was nice to see Cedric portray a father who cares about his family's wellbeing and discipline when necessary. Deep down the family does love eachother and it is seen through their constant troubles while on the road. That is just something that is not usually hilighted in movies and I felt it due to point it out.

In conclusion, this movie really offers nothing new, no real character development, and some occasional humor. The fact that it did this while still trying to hold together the moral fiber of a family, I will give JOHNSON FAMILY VACATION a 3/10.

Dawn of the Dead (2004)

The Sun's Up Here!!!

[6/10 · 31 March 2004]

This year seems to be the Year of the Horror Movie Remake. Beginning with TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE back in October, and now with DAWN OF THE DEAD, many can only imagine what other concepts are being thought up.

However, if any future remake has the stamina that this remake has, then the horror genre may revive itself. DAWN OF THE DEAD is in no sense a breakthrough movie with an inventive plot. Actually we never learn of the reason zombies exist in the first place (it is a remake of the follow up of NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD, where the plot is revealed). But it is the excitement and relentlessness that this film brings about it.

From the fun and intense opening to the finale (which is a little predictable, I should add I have never seen the original all the way through), there is always something going on.

The actors in this film, while several of them have names (particularly Ving Rhames and Mekhi Pheifer), are all decent in the parts they play. They each offer something different to the movie.

The message of consumerism that spawned from the first one is still used here, but not does not remain a main focus.

For having a great sense of style, some intense scenes, and overall fun DAWN OF THE DEAD (2004) rates as a 6/10.

The Passion of the Christ (2004)

Truly Amazing!!!

[9/10 · 31 March 2004]

I do not want to get into how this movie affected me personally, for I, as many others, was greatly moved by this film. What I want to mention is how beautiful this film was in its portrayal and style.

Gibson has truly succeeded in making a Christian film that actually can pass as a mainstream film, for this does. Those that complain about the incessant gore (which is no more than say GLADIATOR or KILL BILL) are overlooking the beautiful artistry that is displayed. From set and props to the style in which the film is done is absolutely incredible. It adds a great deal of symbolism and beauty to the story.

The acting is incredible, and for those who say that Caviezel was not right for Jesus, they could not be more wrong. Also, the woman who played the Virgin Mary really stirred my emotions. The relationship portrayed between Jesus and her is heartfelt and truly brings the humanity to the film.

Like I said, I do not want to get into the negativity that the mass media has branded with this film. I am just glad to see that it has done well and continues to do well.

For those concerned of accuracy, this film was pretty much dead on.

For being such a wonderful, moving, thought provoking film that is astheticaly beautiful I give THE PASSION OF THE CHRIST a 9/10.

Gothika (2003)

Decent Installment To the DarkCastle Co. Yearly Horror Flicks!

[6/10 · 22 November 2003]

First off GOTHIKA, for whatever reason the movie is titled this is beyond me, is your average ghost movie. The ghost appears to the person to deliver some message, and usually pops up in places to surprise that person.

Yet, this movie is not that bad. I wasn't expecting anything too great, but I was pleased. There are some good scare moments, and Halle Berry plays her part well. The ending is a little predictable, as to who is involved, but left me a little more disturbed than I really wanted.

The supernatural part of this movie is typical, but not nearly as fun as say that of THIR13EN GHOSTS (also produced by the same company); however, does provide some good scares. The ghost pretty much exists for the sole reason of adding a little more thrill to the movie's atmosphere; however, Berry's character could have probably reached to the conclusion without the violent ghost's random visits.

If you are not a big fan of horror movies, then this one probably won't change your mind, but for horror fans, this should go over well.

After seeing HOUSE ON HAUNTED HILL, THIR13EN GHOSTS, GHOST SHIP, and now GOTHIKA (all DarkCastle films, one released per year), I am always ready for the next one they will put out.

Although GOTHIKA is nothing special, it was worth the $5.00 I paid to see it, and provided some good scares, I give it a 6/10.

Cold Creek Manor (2003)

Zzz...Zzz...Zzz...Is It Over???

[1/10 · 26 October 2003]

There is no plainer way to say it, but man was this a huge disappointment. This movie is another example of how much a trailer can hype up a movie that should not be in theaters.

Where to begin...the plot lame...the continuity of the movie horrible...the ending predictable and used.

There is absolutely no mystery to this movie and no fun. After about an hour and 15 minutes into the movie I turned to my friends and asked them if they had picked up on anything interesting (both replied with a strong NO). Right from the get go...and from a little help with the preview, any idiot can tell what is going to happen and what the secret behind the house is. The movie makes it so obvious it is not even funny.

The acting in the movie is not the complaint...with what they were given, the performers were fine. It is just this movie isn't scary in the least and nothing remotely interesting even occurs until the last act.

I for one am completely surprised that Sharon Stone and Dennis Quaid, both respectable actors, would do this film. They both better be coming out with a good movie soon, and this was some sort of contract deal...because the script was lame and totally unoriginal.

For being a total piece of garbage and a waste of talent and audiences time (might I add money) COLD CREEK MANOR rates a 1/10.

The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (2003)

Great Comeback for a Hurting Genre!

[8/10 · 26 October 2003]

I originally had my doubts for this one. As of late, horror movies have become mediocre gore fests with little suspense. The genre has practically formed a mold for itself. Especially with the release of FREDDY VS. JASON and JEEPERS CREEPERS 2 back in August, and the horribly disappointing COLD CREEK MANOR in Sept, knowing that TCM was next, I wasn't so sure what to expect.

Another fact that occured to me that raised even more doubts was the fact that the original TCM, while scary and disturbing in its own right, was a very simple story. Not much to expand off of, or at least not in a direction that would not upset fans of the original.

While I had my doubts, I had to see what the filmakers came up with, and much to my surprise they did a darn good job. Hands down, this has to be one of the best horror flicks to come around in a long time...with the exception of THE RING (which might I add shared its creepy kid with MASSACRE). This movie is so much fun to watch. Unlike most horror movies, the characters are dimensional, and the acting is pretty good, not to over or under played.

Although from the start we can pick out who is going to die and who is going to live, this film carries a lot of suspense with it. It is one of the first in a long while where the audience in unison screams.

Now for those who complain that Leatherface has been too much updated and the fact that this movie exposes his face and gives him a skin disease, losen your panties. This remake took some holes that were not filled in the first one (such as why Leatherface is the way he is) and used them to their advantage. The kill/chase scenes are great and you just do not want to close your eyes.

I was ultimately pleasantly surprised, and praise the filmakers for actually producing a remake with character, and not just a cheap scam for money. Truly a thought out and wonderfully put together flick, THE TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE allowed me to have more fun in a movie than I had had in a long time, and thus rates a 8/10.

Cabin Fever (2002)

"Oh no she's dead!"..."That's horrible, wanna have sex?"..."Ok!"

[2/10 · 26 October 2003]

Wow, this movie is ridiculously amateur, in a horror and porno type of way.

Laughable completely from the start, this film had no creativity behind it...just some gore and a really ho*ny cast.

Not showing any plot development, a group of college students, believe it or not, go to a cabin (typical)...they drink the water, get a terrible skin eating disease. What happens next, the characters all turn against each other...and if you get the disease you are gonna be shoved into a shed, while everybody else goes inside and does the nasty; sorry you miss out.

This movie is impossible to take for any level of horror and is completely awful. It should have never been made and to call it formulaic would be a compliment.

Cabin Fever rates just a 2/10, and I gave it a 2 just for making me laugh like I haven't done in a horror film in a while.

Legally Blonde 2: Red, White & Blonde (2003)

Legally Blonde with a change of characters!!!

[5/10 · 12 October 2003]

Legally Blonde was definitely a movie for certain acquired tastes, and the producers should only expect those who enjoyed the first one to follow up for the second.

Having said that, and being someone who appreciated the humor in the first, this sequel is nothing special but decent. It could actuall be compared to sequels of the likes of Home Alone 2. Everything is the same, Elle finds herself in a situation that is far above her, yet rises to the occassion. As the snow shoveling man in the first Hom Alone was replaced by the pigeon lady in the sequel, Paulette (the misfit character, who is in the sequel) is replaced by Sidnet (played by Bob Newhart) an old underappreciated door man at a hotel who knows more about Washington than half the politicians there. Of course as Kevin does with the pigeon lady, Elle bonds with Sidney and he is able to help her. As in the original, there is the selfish character and quick to judge this time replacing Selma Blair with Regina King.

Overall, Elle is faced with the same kind of judgemental people, those who are willing to help, and those who she is able to connect with in different ways. There is nothing new here in this sequel. Reese Witherspoon still has not lost her charm with the character and comes off as loveable as ever, and the entire time we are still cheering for her.

While this movie is nothing special, those who enjoyed the first will once again enjoy this one, but will probably be a little disappointed that everything is the same, including the humor.

For still being a charming, rise to the occasion movie, as the first, yet not offering anything new I give Legally Blonde 2 a 5/10.

Freddy vs. Jason (2003)

Typical: But Still Does It's Job!!!

[21 September 2003]

First things first, I had no expectations for this movie whatsoever. I knew it was going to be simply a bloodfest with bunch of dumb teenagers who can't act. That is how slashers are these days. Let's just say I wasn't wrong. Still, I am a sucker for these stupid movies and have to say that I thought it was decent.

Everything seems a little rushed, we get no time whatsoever to get to know any of the characters, they are simply there as fodder for Jason to wield his machette at. It is not but about 3 minutes after the opening credit sequence when the first victim is had. I would say this is a major problem, but slashers fall into their own formula, and the formula allows for little plot and character development. This is probably because the slasher genre only appeals to certain people, and those people, who will be the ones to like this movie, understand why these movies are made (to come up with new and creative ways to kill off dumb, sex-driven teens).

Having said that, if you have never been a fan of Freddy, Jason, or slashers in general, you will not like this at all. Aside from the concept of bringing two of the slasher greats into one film (which they could have had so much more fun with), there is nothing new here. However, if you enjoy slashers, you will not be let down. Freddy and Jason kill altogether about 25 people, and the filmmakers have done some interesting things with the plot (nothing to ovate, but fun nonetheless).

To wrap up, Freddy vs. Jason is not great, but just on the better side of decent. The filmmakers missed out on a lot of opportunities to make this a more interesting film. While I was entertained for the hour and a half I watched this movie, many will ignore this film and put it in the pile of weird sequels of 80's slashers, such as BRIDE OF CHUCKY (also directed by Ronny Yu, the director of FVJ).

I know this isn't the last we have seen of Freddy, Jason, or Chucky(since he was brought up), let's just hope that one of these times the filmmakers will get creative and make a unique film.

For getting the job done, and being an entertaining hour and a half I give Freddy vs. Jason a 6/10

Scream 2 (1997)

Another Round of all the Screams!!!

[6/10 · 23 April 2003]

It is hard to avoid the fact that Scream 2 is a lot like the first one, same plot line, different setting, victims, and of course killers.

That being said, this is not a bad movie. If you enjoyed the first one, you will like this one just as well. The body count is a little higher in this movie and of course everything is a little drawn out,as sequels tend to do. However, the clever acting, dialogue, and scary scenes are all still there. Craven and his team deserve a little respect for making a decent addition to the horror genre and not screwing up what the original SCREAM had going.

A little more exaggerated, but still filled with plenty of screams, SCREAM 2 rates a 6/10

Darkness Falls (2003)

Turn the lights off on this film!!!

[3/10 · 16 April 2003]

Every once in a while a movie takes a recognizable character and transforms it into something that fits a certain model: comedy, drama, or in this case horror (or what is at least supposed to be horror). This time, instead of Santa Claus, we are working with the tooth fairy, possibly one of the lamest of all characters, even in reality.

Her motivation for taking teeth was that in life she charitably gave children a gold coin for their tooth, but when she was suspected of murder and the town lynched her, it got her a little upset. Now she still collects teeth, but instead of giving the coins, she kills any kid or person that looks at her. A little exaggerated, but none the less it is something to work with.

Other than the above, and all of it is established in the first 5 minutes of the film, this film has no merit or plot. Right from the start all this movie is about is the angered "tooth fairy" killing people. The movie runs no longer than an hour and ten minutes and every scene is just someone getting knocked off. There aren't even any special effects, and after awhile the "tooth fairy" starts to look like a pinata being pulled by a string.

Ultimately, there is no plot, character development, or any creativity put into this movie. Granted there are a few scare scenes and the opening was not to horrible. DARKNESS FALLS rates just a 3/10.