rus_ty Reviews

Scott Pilgrim vs. the World (2010)

Scott Pilgrim VS my review...

[6/10 · 22 August 2012]

Scott Pilgrim VS The World, based off the Oni Press graphic novel series by Bryan Lee O Malley, has had a mix of opinions. Some people love it; however, other people completely hate it. When I first watched it, I didn't view it with a critical mind, so my verdict on it was that it was awesome. Having watched it again with a critical mind, I'm starting to think: Was it really that awesome?

The graphic novels were great, but the 6 books had so much in them, character wise and story wise that seemed way too much to pack into one film. But, with the bad points in the film, it has its up sides. Edgar Wright did a great job at staying true to the source material. A lot of the scenes in the movie looked just like they did in the books, and the comic effects that came on screen made us feel like we were watching a moving graphic novel. The casting also helped a lot also, as most all the actors looked very similar to the comic's characters. Michael Cera and Mary Elizabeth Winsted defiantly suited the roles, especially Jason Schwartzman, who made a great Gideon. Another good thing was that it had the same quirky humour that the books had, and I found myself laughing at what was funny in the graphic novels. But the films flaws are what brings it down from being as good as the books. The thing with the 6 books was, it had A lot going on. There's a lot of characters' that have their own back-stories, ranging from the evil ex-boyfriends to Scott's fellow band members and friends, and I felt that pretty much none of them were explored enough in this film.

The whole back story between Scott and Kim was briefly mentioned but not fully explored; the Envy Adams story was also brought up, but only left us asking what happened between them in the first place? The ex boyfriends had very little screen time each, and although that is the case in the books, at least the books explained a little more about them. Mathew Patel had his story explained, but then we are given the same cheesy singing scene that was one of the first books low points. The Twins were completely wasted due to neither of them having any lines to say, and there was no real confrontation between Ramona and Todd and how Todd is, basically, a cheating scumbag.

The relationship between Scott and Ramona didn't work at all. It took 6 books to develop the love story and the conflicts between them, but, like a lot of other factors in this film, that part seemed rushed through also. Ramona had the same habit she had in the books, she was quite the confusing character whose personality goes from annoying to very annoying after some time. I didn't buy the romance between Scott and Ramona either, and even towards the end when it's all over, I still don't see how they manage to make the relationship work together. Everything seemed to be summed up within a few minutes that leaves us asking things like: "Wait, what happened between those two?" or "Well that got summed up a bit quick" or even "They have TOTALLY missed that part out!". Understandable, movies can go down a different route from their source material, but this movie tried to fit everything in that resulted in it being quite a mess of a film. And Ramona had the same habit she had in the books: She was quite the confusing character whose personality go very annoying after some time.

Whereas the films CGI was often quite decent, some fighting scenes were a little glitchy. I'm not too sure if that was their intention to make fight scenes glitchy like a video game, but I don't think the whole video game effect appealed to me. Another thing that I'm unsure of is, are these characters' actually in a video game? The lives, the fighting and the sound effects, is it set in the real world or an actual video game world? Whereas in the books Bryan managed to get away with it, for a film it doesn't work all that well.

The verdict is, Scott Pilgrim VS the World is an enjoyable film if you don't pay too much attention to details. However if its details and a proper structured story you are after, I doubt that you will enjoy it.

[Rec]² (2009)

What we get is the same as the original... only not as satisfying.

[6/10 · 17 August 2012]

Rec 2 is a direct follow up from the first instalment in the Rec series. We begin where the first Rec left off, at the same apartment with no word from the inside survivors. A SWAT team is sent in to investigate the quarantined area, and with the amount of SWAT men we get, we know that there's going to be a high body count like its predecessor. And to begin with, it delivered with the suspense. As the SWAT teams investigating the still scary apartment, we don't know where the infected are or where they are hiding. I thought it was also good how they kept the same scary atmosphere of the apartment that gave us chills in the first Rec. So after 15 odd minutes of the SWAT characters talking and exploring the dead apartment, things pick up once again when the infected appear.

And from there, it all sort of goes downhill. Whereas the first bunch of characters in Rec were more fleshed out, the sequel only features basic SWAT members that never really got developed to start with. In Rec we had the reporters, the innocent people from the apartment, a young girl and her mother and characters that are more likable than a SWAT team. The film certainly did lack suspense, for one. Because the films in the dark so much, and because the SWAT team are all dressed in black, it doesn't make a difference to us as to who dies because the whole SWAT team just look like people to be written off with not much development in them at all. Typical for a horror sequel...

What made Rec so good in the first place was its horror and suspense. It was scary to us because we felt just as trapped in the apartment building as the innocent people were, and when they were dying one by one, the risks got higher because all the odds are against any survivors. The quick amount of infected that kept growing made the situation far more scary for Recs characters. Rec 2 didn't have that feel. It was killing of the SWAT team one by one for the sake to make a sequel to a great horror original.

The infected zombies still look great though. The makeup effects are still very well done and the death scenes were at the standard of the original. But that is as close to the original as its going to get. But the films scores on another level; we get the return of the reporter who supposedly died in the first Rec. And since she returns the film gets a scent of the first, bringing us back to known territory that saved the film from being a total disaster. Sure, she comes back in the last 20 odd minutes or so, but those last 20 odd minutes providing a suitable, shocking ending that saved the movie that gave us chills just like the first film.

It's nowhere near the originals standards. Until the reporter returns that's when things start truly happening, which is a shame because if they had brought her back sooner, the film would have turned a lot a lot better. But I was glad to see an ending that was just as satisfying as the original.

[REC] 3: Genesis (2012)

Rec3 tries to be something different, but just becomes another movie cash in.

[3/10 · 17 August 2012]

The first Rec film brought us great suspense, gore and terrifying zombies that made it a very creepy horror movie. Rec2 was a rehash of what the first one was, giving us a film with basically the same plot that gave us nothing new. Now we have Rec3. No denying, Rec3 tries to be something different to its predecessors. We are no longer trapped inside the apartment that we were in during Rec 1 and 2, but instead we are at a wedding. It's not a follow up to the first two, hell; it's not even related to the first two. One thing that it is, is that it's everything that we have seen before. But you can tell that it tries to be different. But just because we have new characters, a new setting and a thin storyline stretched across the time span of 80 painful minutes, it doesn't mean that it's anything original.

The very thin story is that a young couple are about to get married, and when we see the Uncle, or whatever relative he was, show up with a bandaged hand we know all hell is going to break loose. And it does, and what we get is a wedding massacre that I'm pretty sure the couple will defiantly remember if they survive this movie. The husband and wife get separated into two separate groups in the riot, and have to find their way back to each other without getting brutally ripped to pieces by the infected wedding guests. Simple story, easy enough to understand like the first two plots, but it couldn't get any more boring!

As expected, the unimportant characters (that I'm pretty sure were invented to just be killed) get picked off one by one giving us some good gore and zombie scenes, but it lacks that fear and suspense and genuine horror that the first Rec possessed. So whilst your stereotypical characters are dying, which you pretty much expected from the start, the newlyweds desperately try to reunite. But one thing about this film is that it is very, very stupid. We have a man dressed as a SpongeBob like character (for whatever reason), creepy looking zombie uncles, and the ridiculous scene at the end. And I swear, in the history of zombie films and horror films alike, I have NEVER seen the survivors escape the zombies by reading Genesis (hence the title) to stop the zombies from attacking them. What... I'm pretty sure that telling zombies the Genesis story will NOT get them to stop wanting to munch your face off. The annoying part was, it didn't really give us enough explanation as to why the whole scheme actually pulled off. And then we have the terribly bland, pointless ending. After the Bride has decapitated zombie after zombie with a chainsaw (which even I'll admit that scene was complete bad ass), she gets bitten on the hand. Taking extreme action the husband chops her arm off, and it still doesn't work, his Bride will still turn. The last 10 to 15 minutes is possibly one of the worst ways to end a movie; by reading zombies the Bible to stop them, the husband lobbing his wife's arm off for her to still only change a few minutes later, and even after all that we've sat through, the writer/director still laughed at their seats as they gave us the worst ending of a horror movie ever. Not that a good ending would have saved the film, the whole 80 minutes seemed to drag on like it was a 2 hour movie that left us completely unsatisfied and made us think how pointless it really was to sit through this appalling mess.

Rec 3 is the same old rehashed material from before, giving us no story and bland characters that even had me and my friends rooting for the zombies.

Sucker Punch (2011)

Chicks, guns, explosions and warriors... Well, it sounded good...

[5/10 · 17 August 2012]

There is no denying that Zack Snyder is a very visionary director. If anyone has seen his graphic novel styled movies 300 and Watchmen, it's clear to see where his profession is. To dazzle the eyes of his viewers which he does incredibly well every time. But his story telling is where things begin to flop.

Yes, the visuals in Sucker Punch are amazing. We have sword wielding, guns blasting, explosions going off, great big fire breathing dragons, planes in the sky, battlefields, chicks slaying stuff everywhere, but do I see a story anywhere? Beyond all that marvellous CGI, surely there must be a story? No, there isn't. Even the makers of this film got lost in the wonders of the pointless action that kept getting rammed down our throats to a point where it just became BORING. Sure, seeing chicks smash crap up and slay bad guys is fun at first, but after a while it gets to repetitive that gets you asking: "Okay, can we see some story now?"

Sucker Punch revolves around the character Babydoll, who accidentally shoots and kills her sister when in self defence of her abusive step father. She is sent to a mental institution for girls, where she is joined by her "comrades" Sweet Pea, Amber, Blondie, and Rocket. Although the place is meant to be a mental institution, it seems more like a strip club the way the girls are treated by the man who runs the place. The acting of the five girls are very bland, all the lines are said with no emotion and they all just seem very wooden acted and two dimensional. Sure, they pull it off in the battles and action scenes, because all they have to do is scream and shoot things and blow things up which, let's be honest, even the worst actors can do. Even Emily Browning, who did a great role in A Series of Unfortunate Events, was sadly a disappointment in this.

Now, Babydoll has no intention of staying in the institution. She dreams up a pretend world filled with dragons and warriors and Nazi zombies, where she is told she has to collect four items so she can escape the institution. Seeing as all the action takes place in their crazy messed up heads, I can't see how any of it matters to us. Sure, seeing Emily Browning battle three massive Samurai Warriors is fun and exciting at first, but then we drift further and further from the real world and more into this dream world that a ten year old would create if he was bored in math class. We've all been there.

Yes, all the girls are insane, why else would they imagine all the battle sequences that happen so repeatedly? But Sucker Punch, believe it or not, started out promising, for about 10 minutes. It had to potential to actually be a good movie, but the more and more action sequences and CGI they throw into one scene, the storyline just gets thinner and thinner and eventually disappears where we don't care what happens to the characters anymore.

Sucker Punch will, without doubt, dazzle you with its visuals and mindless action. It could be fun with a bunch of mates, if all you want to see is chicks and robots and dragons with some booze. But if you're after a serious story with well developed characters and a storyline that stays strong all the way through, then I'd give it a miss.

CGI sequences= Stunning, 10/10

Story and characters= 3/10

Trick 'r Treat (2007)

I wasn't tricked, I was treated!

[8/10 · 16 August 2012]

Nowadays, there are so many horror films out there that are packed full of mindless gore, repetitive jump scares and little plot. The many sequels of Saw relied on all gore and no story, the Hostel Trilogy is plain sick, (even though the first one was just about OK) and many many others that probably couldn't satisfy the sickest minds. Which brings us the difference between Trick R Treat and all those other terrible horror films out there.

Trick R Treat sure is original. It's not some mindless blood fest, it doesn't have pointless nudity, and it isn't some crappy remake of an original classic horror film that we are getting so many of these days. It's purely an original horror film, and it's a breath of fresh air. Trick R Treat is an indie, stand alone horror film directed by Michael Dougherty. The film that contains 4 individual stories that all tie in together at the end of the film. The stories themselves are actually very good, keeping us on the edge of our seats with interest and gives us a nice little twist at the end of each one that even managed to surprise me when I watched it a second time a few months later. Sure, it's not the scariest film ever made, it isn't that gory either. What it is is clever, old school original horror that separates itself from all those other horrors out there.

The stories revolve around a young teenager (Anna Paquin) looking for someone to have her first time with, an irritable old man living alone, a school teacher with a dark, twisted side, and a horrible school prank revolving around what seems to be only an urban legend. Sound simple enough, right? Well, each one has its own shock and twist towards the end, and how they all link in with each other is really well done. One character I particularly liked was the creepy young child with the pumpkin like mask that appeared in each story. He doesn't feature in much, but he really gets to shine in the very last scene that is defiantly worth the wait.

So give it a shot, it's something new that sadly we just don't get enough of these days.

The Amazing Spider-Man (2012)

The Not So Amazing Spider Man

[4/10 · 16 August 2012]

As a long time fan of the Spider Man movies and comic books alike, I was eagerly awaiting to see this reboot. I had high hopes for the film as being a fan of Marc Webb's work also. I was sure that the film was in good hands. So as I sat in the cinema with my buddies waiting for the film to begin, I was expecting a reboot to show us more about Peter's parents and a better back story.

And boy, was I disappointed.

The Sam Raimi films had fantastic action, humour, heart and soul, which this film showed a great lack off. I can't even begin to explain how disappointed I was! What we get out of this movie is barely any action and A lot of romance, Parker constantly unmasking himself (I thought the whole point of Spider Mans secret identity was to, I don't know, KEEP IT A SECRET?) We had the Lizard, which had to be the most disappointing villain in super hero movie history, and the fact that it didn't follow much from the comic books at all.

The casting was alright enough, Emma Stone made a decent enough Gwen Stacey, and I hope that she will break into her character more in the sequels. Andrew Garfield didn't suit Spider Man at all. He didn't look nerdy like Toby Maguire did in the originals and I didn't really see him portray the character as he should have done. Plus, Peter Parker never used to skateboard, did he? No, I didn't think so. Sally Field as Aunt May didn't work at all, and Martin Sheen as Uncle Ben actually turned out okay... Even though he was in 3 scenes total... The trio of Toby, Kirsten and James made a better cast then this lot. Plus, the lack of Harry and J Jonah Jameson was defiantly missed.

Now, back when I mentioned that the Raimi trilogy had heart and soul, it was a shock to see that this film had very little of it. When Uncle Ben died in the 2002 movie, it was a really sad scene, because you actually cared about him, and it tugged our heart strings (or at least mine) to see Uncle Ben die. And that Peter showed genuine sadness and heart ache after Uncle Ben's death. With this, Uncle Ben is killed and it's sad for all about two minutes. Peter showed no sadness or emotion after his Uncles death, and the goodbye scene as Peter watches him die just seems awkward and the two didn't really connect all that well.

The Lizard however, seemed like a suitable villain to start this re- booted series of. The Lizard is an interesting character, and this movie could have handled it really well, except it didn't. The Lizard looked like a Godzilla rip off and there seemed to be no humanity in the character at all. Shouldn't it have shown a tormented Dr. Curt Conner's as he is going through these changes? And after the big fight at the end, the Lizards story is quickly wrapped up by a news report saying he was arrested. Now, in the end of every Sam Raimi Spider Man, there was humanity in each of the villains before they died/ or left. The Green Goblin showed his human side to Peter when they were both unmasked, right before his glider impaled him; Doc Ock showed that he still had goodness in him by sacrificing himself to save the city; and also, Sandman even had a moment with Peter that showed his still had goodness in him. The Lizard? Oh no, they just made him a ridiculous dinosaur for Spider Man to fight and defeat.

Also, why the hell did they make Gwen Stacey know Peter is Spider Man in this film? Gwen Stacey NEVER knew who Spider Man was in the comics, as she blamed Spider Man for the death of her father. With this movie they screwed all that up and made Gwen a more ballsy character than she should have been. And why were there so many spiders??? There was meant to be ONE special spider that bites Peter, not God knows how many that were shown. Plus, I'm pretty sure if you get shot in the leg you CANT keep running.

The only redeeming factor in this movie was Spider Man had a great sense of humour, and the web slinging scenes (beside the last one) were also well done. Not a fan of the new suit though. In summary, The Amazing Spider Man was a big disappointment. I'm still standing by the Raimi originals, and I hope that they make an improvement with The Amazing Spider Man 2.