Reviews

10 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
3/10
A real disappointment
20 August 2021
It's a mess. And it's a real shame.

The opening 20 minutes or so are very strong and you think you're in good hands. While the film is (reasonably) low-budget the visuals are good throughout (as is the sound design) and the premise is pretty intriguing - you don't know where the story is going and you want to know more (those first 5 minutes or so are particularly effective). Clearly, much time and effort has gone into the presentation of the whole thing.

But as things progress real weaknesses begin to show. The main bulk of the story happens over a few days and during this time several events occur that would shake a city, let alone a small town. Yet we're not even given the sense that the community is even aware that these things have happened; there's absolutely no gravity to them.

And as the film goes on more and more is obviously demanded of the actors, the director and the script in order to sell the escalating events to the audience - but all these things are seriously lacking (with the exception of Chukwudi Iwuji who plays the cop; he's genuinely impressive and the real standout here).

Immediately after being subjected to something shocking and brutal, characters will behave and talk in ways that seem muted and unbelievable (it's partly the writing, partly the direction). Occasionally some scenes, tonally, skew off in directions that seem weird and out of place (there's a couple of scenes that feel like they're been yoinked out of the Friday the 13th franchise and just dropped in here and they don't work).

Some of the supporting characters are clearly played by non-actors. This is only a little distracting in the first half, but later the film really leans on some of them - and they're not able to do what they need to do. Ultimately none of this matters as the endgame is completely broken. If the script had delivered all of this would be forgiven.

The writing is decent until it really needs to get hold of the audience and communicate just how frantic, oppressive and urgent things are supposed to be getting - and it's then that we find the film doesn't know how to convincingly do these things. More than that - it just starts getting silly.

And as we approach the end of the film it just unravels into a daft mess and the sense of mystery and intrigue gives way to a series of tiresome twists that aren't surprising or involving. Instead be prepared to be bemused and a little bored.

There was real promise here, but a very good start makes the inept final act feel even worse than it usually would.

Technically it's generally very good with an assured sense of style and it will be interesting to see what the director does next. Hopefully someone will cast Chukwudi Iwuji in something befitting his talents - he deserves to be in something better than this.

Disappointing.
46 out of 68 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Enigmatic, troubling and impressive
6 April 2013
Warning: Spoilers
Takashi Ishii continues to be enigmatic, troubling and impressive with what is perhaps his most difficult and demanding film.

A beautiful girl hires Jiro to find an expensive watch that she has apparently lost in a forest. He doesn't believe her story but accepts the job anyway, and soon things unravel and become altogether more twisted and murderous. To complicate things even more he has attracted the interest of a persistent policewoman...

This film doesn't lean on the narrative of the first film much, but it's clearly all one emotional journey and knowledge of the first film really is a requirement.

The first film has a number of standout, haunting, scenes (like Jiro's pursuit of a gun or his trying to rescue a drowning woman from a sinking car) and this film also has moments that stay with you long after the film has ended.

A crying woman is objectified by the camera - she sobs while we look, lingering too long, on her naked flesh. She's a person, but she's also a sexual object. We're troubled. How are we supposed to react to this?

In what must be one of the most loaded and complex sex scenes ever seen in a film one character is, mentally, a broken child, but she's also, partly, a calculating seductress. The other character is a good man, but part of him wants to be seduced and doesn't care about anything else. They find solace in each other. Is this a good thing or a bad one? The sex itself is simple, but the drives and histories behind it are not. Perhaps a good man should act better, but he finds himself persuaded by the immediacy of flesh. The couple on screen fall into each other - our minds race.

Four characters drag bodies up a mountain in the night. Logic and self-awareness have been completely abandoned. These aren't people anymore; instead they are shadows, totally consumed by their lusts and locked into horrific behaviour.

In a scene that is almost ten minutes long a naked woman shrieks and repeatedly whips herself. It veers from being hypnotic and emotionally engaging to boring and feeling like bad performance art and then back again...

Some people, understandably, will not be able to engage with this film. Occasionally characters act and react in unlikely ways and some of the themes and depictions of sex and violence are unpleasant. But it's a film that has it's own fever-dream emotional logic, and people who can engage the film on its own terms will find it incredibly rewarding.

The performances are uniformly fantastic. As is often the case it is Ishii's women who make the most striking impression. Hiroko SatĂ´ is the obvious standout as the tormented femme-fatale, but Shinobu ÅŒtake's performance is her equal as the demented harridan mother. Naoto Takenaka is as impressive here as he was in the original film. It's his performance that gives this film its heart and if he were a lesser actor the whole thing would have fallen apart. It does not - instead it soars.

This isn't a film for everyone, but some will find it to be bewilderingly intelligent, moving and truly audacious. Will Ishii return to this character again? Perhaps not, it does feel like the character has come full-circle, but I still find myself hoping that he does. I just hope he doesn't leave it 17 years again.
9 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Kovak Box (2006)
4/10
What's in the box? Disappointment
21 May 2012
A successful Science-Fiction author is invited to an idyllic Spanish island to talk about his work at the behest of a mysterious organisation. What should be a pleasant workman's holiday turns into something more sinister when people start committing suicide for unknown reasons - the only clue is that it is somehow all connected to his first book, that he wrote years earlier.

It sounds like an interesting premise, and it is, but although the first few minutes seem promising the leaden direction and pedestrian script ultimately make this a difficult 90+ minutes to sit through. Characters regularly act in unlikely, bizarre and occasionally unexplainable ways for no other reason than it helps to advance the story. This is evidence of the real problem with the film - the story is striving for big moments of suspense, mystery and danger but it is not able to convincingly weave them together into something that works well.

Such problems could be partially forgiven if it had all been building to something worthwhile. The finale is supposed to be thought-provoking and enigmatic and can be interpreted in two ways - unfortunately both are rotten. One interpretation will have you rolling your eyes in yet more disbelieving disappointment and the other lacks any sense of drama and suspense. Either way, the ending plays as uncommitted and ham-fisted.

Ultimately the only things to recommend here are the actors, who are decent, and the score, which is very good; but these do not come close to atoning for the myriad problems that run through the story and the way in which it is told. Disappointing.
2 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Paradox (I) (2010)
4/10
They should have conjured up a better script and production...
25 September 2010
It sounded interesting. An Earth in an alternate dimension where an understanding of science doesn't really exist and where magic powers everything (guns, phones, cars... everything). A world where a puzzled detective starts using science to try and unravel a sinister mystery...

It's an interesting premise for a film. It was also an interesting premise for a film back in 1991 when HBO made the much-loved but little seen Cast a Deadly Spell. If you can track down a copy it's well worth a watch.

Unfortunately this (apparently adapted from a comic-book), is a complete mess.

If you're taking the audience to another world, a world that works in different and exciting ways, then the script needs to explain this new place and take the time to make it feel real. Instead the story here rocks along at breakneck speed with very little time or effort being spent on trying to seduce the audience and pull them along with it. Some of the dialogue is awful (and the voice-over at the end is especially bad).

Apparently this was originally intended for a cinematic release. However the decision to make it for TV must have been made before production began, as it looks every bit like a TV movie. The director has worked on the TV show Sanctury and it absolutely shows; the feel of it - the way it's been shot and the way CGI backgrounds are used - is absolutely identical. The difference is that here it falls absolutely flat.

Clearly much of the film is supposed to look and feel like a 50's noir (the costumes and sets), but no effort has been made to shoot and light it in any particular style (unless they were actually trying to make it look like cheap Canadian television). Occasionally the action stops and the scene turns into a drawn panel from a comic-book in a way that is supposed to be highly stylised and dynamic, but isn't. Here, in this film, it serves no purpose, looks wrong, happens far too often and ruins atmosphere. And then you have the use of CGI backgrounds, which are in a completely different style to anything else in the film and really jar. Sin City this isn't.

I would criticise the editing - there are some really strange choices that just don't work - but I honestly don't know if it's the editors fault. It feels like they only shot enough footage to properly fill 80 minutes or so and then they had to find ways of padding the running time out. So we get comic-book effects. So we get clunky, amateurish and unnecessary scenes (there's one scene of Sorbo thinking about Song, using flashbacks, which is just horrible), that suddenly crash in without warning and then crash out again. Also, some scenes just don't hang together properly and it sometimes feels as if a vital shot is missing.

The only good and worthwhile parts of this whole thing are the two leads, Kevin Sorbo and Steph Song. Watching Sorbo in something really second-rate made me realise how dependably good he is; there's nothing here that particularly stretches his talents but he still manages to get the job done despite having little to work with. Steph Song also takes an under-written role and manages to imbue it with some genuine heart and feeling. I ended up liking her character a lot and it was purely because of her performance. I predict that we'll see her in bigger and better things in the future.

In summary? The script fires the plot at you too fast, it looks and feels all wrong and the editor probably tried his best to rescue it but failed. And the actors deserved better.

Disappointing.
29 out of 33 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Captivity (2007)
2/10
Trust me, you have better things to do with your time...
25 July 2007
Elisha Cuthbert was perfectly fine in the recent House of Wax (which was the same kind of role), but occasionally seems totally adrift here. This is the fault of the director (Roland Joffe - who was once a decent film-maker), but it's hard to single him out for criticism as every single aspect of this film seems to be just as lousy and half-arsed as the next. The look of the film, the story, the characters and the dialogue have no personality or life of their own and instead are clearly uninspired wholesale rip-offs of those found in the likes of the Hostel and Saw films and then reassembled into this dull, turgid, mess. If you want an example of an inept, unloved, souless, studio-funded zeitgeist cash-in flick then here it is. Avoid.
12 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Hostel (2005)
5/10
A disappointment
7 July 2006
*Spoilers* The first act, quite rightly, is a slow moving affair that tries to set the scene and introduce the characters. Unfortunately, characterisation is virtually non-existent. The main characters are broad, unengaging, stereotypes that the audience may find it hard to believe in and root for. The main idea, that there is a place where the rich and jaded can go to inflict suffering on their fellow man, is an interesting one, but themes about the nature of man and his place in society are not developed. Instead you are left watching someone you don't know very well, and don't care about, in a nasty, one-dimensional, situation. The inventiveness and grittiness of the torture scenes is to be applauded but it almost seems like a waste of effort. The final nail in the coffin is a forced, contrived and deeply unlikely finale that leaves you wishing a better writer had been given the task of fleshing out the genuinely interesting premise.
0 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
A for Andromeda (2006 TV Movie)
8/10
Flawed, but intelligent and enjoyable
21 June 2006
This is a fine example of British science-fiction. Necessarily wordy due to its low-budget, successful British SF has always had to rely on strong concepts, strong writing and carefully created atmosphere. In the same vain as Quatermass and Dr Who much of the action consists of people in a room talking about abstracts. Some will be bored to tears; but those with an imagination may find this story of predeterminism vs personal will and morality very engaging. If there's a flaw then it's that some of the, very real, science is over-simplified to an unbelievable degree. An audience is able to accept the idea of an alien transmission containing instructions on how to make a malevolent supercomputer. But the idea that these scientists are also experts in genetic engineering and quickly have all of the expertise and equipment necessary for their task stretches credibility too far. It's a shame because these problems could have been easily avoided with a little more creativity. At heart though this is a good, old-fashioned, morality play with some impressive performances and a rare intelligence.
19 out of 21 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Challenging, but worthwhile
15 June 2006
Takashi Ishii's Black Angel 2 follows a beautiful hit-woman on her descent into alcoholism and self-loathing. The first act is an unsurprising retread of numerous assassin/gangster flicks. When Ishii changes gears some will find themselves engaged; others will find it a deeply uncomfortable watch. The depiction of rape is potentially troubling but Ishii's women are ultimately shown to be more powerful than their aggressors. It's an uneven film but occasionally it borders on truly bravura film-making, with a handful of masterful scenes. Challenging, little seen and sharing only it's title with the inferior original. 8/10
4 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Zatoichi films? This is a good place to start...
31 August 2005
One of the more accessible films in the series due to its simpler story (two heroes ally themselves against an evil but then find themselves on different sides due to a mis-understanding). Though the Zatoichi films often vary in style and in tone, the themes (treat others as you would wish to be treated, be true to your word, gamble within your means, etc), remain constant. Here, the language barrier between Zatoichi and The One-Armed Swordsman (one is Chinese, the other Japanese), is a theme that will have had a greater resonance for its native audience rather than those in the west, but the story works well just as a straight-forward adventure yarn. ShintarĂ´ Katsu is as reliably great as ever. By turns dynamic and exacting with the sword, warm of heart with the just and needy, steely and unmerciful of the greedy and vindictive. Zatoichi is one of the great movie heroes. ShintarĂ´ Katsu, one of the great heroic actors. If you haven't seen these films then you could do worse than start here.
11 out of 15 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Films you see when you're young that really leave an impression on you...
26 August 2005
...this is one of those. Saw it as a kid at 3am one morning/night. It stuck in my head. It's one of those films like The Quiet Earth, Miracle Mile, The Unbelievable Truth, The Red Squirel (*rants on and on*), that you don't see for years but are really worth hunting down again. I guess it's about loneliness and not knowing where your life is going, and how you should just be yourself. Which sounds trite and a bit dull, but it's not. It's got a telepathic dog in it. A post- apocalyptic wasteland. It's *not* a totally serious film but it's poignant. It *is* totally barking mad. It's well worth watching. The director didn't make another film after this. Shame.
2 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed