Black is white, up is down and right is left in this expensive failure of an adaptation. Literally NOTHING is as it was in the book except the main premise of Gunslinger VS Walter. Most forgettable Stephen King movie ever. Disappointment doesn't come close to describing this dog's breakfast of a film...
Reviews
22 Reviews
Eye in the Sky
(2015)
Politically-driven GARBAGE
7 September 2016
Warning: Spoilers
I give this a generous 3 for decent acting by its largely British cast, nothing else.
Let me tell you about the morality of "collateral damage" in military drone strikes against Islamic threats:
1. THEY would never extend the same checks and balances for us. They just STRIKE and by that I mean bomb innocent people.
2. The chances of having some insubordinate little imbecile who questions a general's authority are zero to none in any NORMAL chain of command.
3. Trying your best to save ONE girl's life whilst putting 80 in risk is just LUNACY. War is WAR.
Ridiculously progressive film about the morality of this 21st Century's amoral wars (aren't they all?) against an immoral enemy.
PS - I haven't been active here for a good 4 or 5 years, but this film made me log in again. Repeat: it is RUBBISH.
Let me tell you about the morality of "collateral damage" in military drone strikes against Islamic threats:
1. THEY would never extend the same checks and balances for us. They just STRIKE and by that I mean bomb innocent people.
2. The chances of having some insubordinate little imbecile who questions a general's authority are zero to none in any NORMAL chain of command.
3. Trying your best to save ONE girl's life whilst putting 80 in risk is just LUNACY. War is WAR.
Ridiculously progressive film about the morality of this 21st Century's amoral wars (aren't they all?) against an immoral enemy.
PS - I haven't been active here for a good 4 or 5 years, but this film made me log in again. Repeat: it is RUBBISH.
Jonny Quest
(1964–1965)
The best cartoon a boy could watch...
27 May 2014
Jonny Quest had everything: science experiments gone wrong, crypto-zoology, all the coolest technological gadgets, and a superb cast.
30+ years later I still remember some episodes and the art clearly, few cartoons were made like this at the time, if any. And if you loved mystery and monsters, you had to look no further! It was the thinking boy's Scooby Doo, more grown-up, less cheesy, and all action and adventure.
If only they still made cartoons like this today..shows like Ben 10 came close, but there is and will be only one JQ.
30+ years later I still remember some episodes and the art clearly, few cartoons were made like this at the time, if any. And if you loved mystery and monsters, you had to look no further! It was the thinking boy's Scooby Doo, more grown-up, less cheesy, and all action and adventure.
If only they still made cartoons like this today..shows like Ben 10 came close, but there is and will be only one JQ.
Case 39
(2009)
Clichéd garbage from start to finish
18 March 2013
The preview was edited very well. That is the best thing I can say about this mishmash of wannabe horror supernatural tripe. Shelling out 15 bucks and 105 minutes of my life on the DVD was one of the worst decisions I've made with film.
Zellweger, who was once semi-cute in Jerry Maguire and mildly annoying in the Diary of some loser chick, is absolutely, utterly appalling as a sole anchor for this atrocious concoction that tries to be Rosemary's baby, Omen, Exorcist, and so many other great classics hashed together.
The atmosphere wasn't tense enough, the story was non-existent, the evil wasn't palpable, the scares were laughable. Except for one single scene where the girl is interviewed by her psychiatrist, Bradley Cooper, the rest of this film is trashcan material and no-one should ever spend a penny on watching it. Not even on TV, coz electricity costs money.
Zellweger, who was once semi-cute in Jerry Maguire and mildly annoying in the Diary of some loser chick, is absolutely, utterly appalling as a sole anchor for this atrocious concoction that tries to be Rosemary's baby, Omen, Exorcist, and so many other great classics hashed together.
The atmosphere wasn't tense enough, the story was non-existent, the evil wasn't palpable, the scares were laughable. Except for one single scene where the girl is interviewed by her psychiatrist, Bradley Cooper, the rest of this film is trashcan material and no-one should ever spend a penny on watching it. Not even on TV, coz electricity costs money.
Elementary
(2012–2019)
Sad copy of a great show
22 February 2013
I watched "Sherlock" - the UK version of this show, and was literally blown away!! The attention to detail, character development, accuracy of 221B Baker Street in the 21st century, extreme complexity of the crimes and humanity of both main characters, all make me beg for more. I strongly advise anyone who likes this show to get their hands on the earlier English version ASAP.
This version, however, is almost the opposite. Shoddy mystery stories, no atmosphere, and Watson's a chick!?!? and a fat zilch on all the rest. Lucy Liu's "Joan" Watson is almost made of cardboard. Yes she's hottish, but no she cannot act. This may as well be Sherlock Holmes solves easy puzzles in Mars. Where's the fun if you're not made to think and guess?
Almost laughable, and certainly disappointing.
This version, however, is almost the opposite. Shoddy mystery stories, no atmosphere, and Watson's a chick!?!? and a fat zilch on all the rest. Lucy Liu's "Joan" Watson is almost made of cardboard. Yes she's hottish, but no she cannot act. This may as well be Sherlock Holmes solves easy puzzles in Mars. Where's the fun if you're not made to think and guess?
Almost laughable, and certainly disappointing.
Grimm
(2011–2017)
Not grim at all, but delightful
13 February 2013
Rarely does a series move me to review it. But this one is quite special. The premise is almost like Monsters Inc where the little girl scares the monsters under the bed - just made for adults. And what a lot of monsters there are here! The possibilities are almost endless...
Vaguely based on the Grimm tales, this series transports those tales into the 21st century far better than any other recent attempt at it. Each episode is a surprise, some have major frights in them, though the one criticism I have is that the main character isn't "grim" enough.
But to me the revelation - and half the fun of this show - is the character Monroe, played masterfully by Silas Weir Mitchell - truly funny, bringing a human touch to the monsters on display... he truly deserves an award for his role in this.
Vaguely based on the Grimm tales, this series transports those tales into the 21st century far better than any other recent attempt at it. Each episode is a surprise, some have major frights in them, though the one criticism I have is that the main character isn't "grim" enough.
But to me the revelation - and half the fun of this show - is the character Monroe, played masterfully by Silas Weir Mitchell - truly funny, bringing a human touch to the monsters on display... he truly deserves an award for his role in this.
The Avengers
(2012)
Hand-clapping good!
15 July 2012
Warning: Spoilers
I felt compelled to review this, having just seen it 2 months after its release - the wait was agonising at times, but worth every second! Very few films have made me beam and laugh and cheer and clap so much. Terminator 2. Batman Begins. Iron Man. And a select handful of others.
The Avengers is a little bit of a slow burner, but with delightful ingredients on the screen, it makes for a fabulous, explosive and tasty finish.
I'd have to say, it was superbly orchestrated from start to finish, and the highlights must go to the Thor/Iron Man scuffle, and the grand finale which has - surprisingly - The Hulk as its main and certainly best attraction. After two average Hulk films, THIS one more than compensates for them, with humour ("I'm always angry") and punchiness (it stopping one of the megamonsters and slapping Loki around as it he were a Barbie doll - awesome!).
Other highlights are the Cap telling the NYPD what to do and Loki's masterful interrogation by Romanoff.
All in all, the best action I've seen in a few years. Cannot wait for them coming up against Thanos in AV2!
The Avengers is a little bit of a slow burner, but with delightful ingredients on the screen, it makes for a fabulous, explosive and tasty finish.
I'd have to say, it was superbly orchestrated from start to finish, and the highlights must go to the Thor/Iron Man scuffle, and the grand finale which has - surprisingly - The Hulk as its main and certainly best attraction. After two average Hulk films, THIS one more than compensates for them, with humour ("I'm always angry") and punchiness (it stopping one of the megamonsters and slapping Loki around as it he were a Barbie doll - awesome!).
Other highlights are the Cap telling the NYPD what to do and Loki's masterful interrogation by Romanoff.
All in all, the best action I've seen in a few years. Cannot wait for them coming up against Thanos in AV2!
Two and a Half Men
(2003–2015)
No Charlie, No Show!
18 October 2011
I'm looking forward to the 'powers that be' realising their mistake, killing off Kutcher's character "Walden", slamming Sheen into an iron-clad rehab programme before bringing him back as a ghost that haunts the house Alan's inherited from Walden in Malibu. Or something similar. Maybe Walden goes Buddhist and gets reincarnated by Charlie.
ANYTHING as long as Sheen replaces Kutcher or at least reappears regularly. Forgive me, but Ashton Kutcher in this format can ONLY appeal to slightly retarded teenage girls - and no-one else. And what the hell is up with underusing Jake in this new series?? Do the creators/producers/notwork remember even WHY the show is called what it is?! Even the worst episode with Sheen was better than the best one with Kutcher.
Luckily, I have the entire old series on DVD coz this one blows monolithic chunks.
Old series: 9/10 New series: 1/10
ANYTHING as long as Sheen replaces Kutcher or at least reappears regularly. Forgive me, but Ashton Kutcher in this format can ONLY appeal to slightly retarded teenage girls - and no-one else. And what the hell is up with underusing Jake in this new series?? Do the creators/producers/notwork remember even WHY the show is called what it is?! Even the worst episode with Sheen was better than the best one with Kutcher.
Luckily, I have the entire old series on DVD coz this one blows monolithic chunks.
Old series: 9/10 New series: 1/10
The Origin of Species!
28 August 2011
I haven't reviewed a film for quite a while now, and the main reason is that for the past year or so, films that get ratings of 7 or 8 on this site have proved to be rather disappointing.
So again I saw a rating of 8 and thought I might be disappointed.
HOW WRONG I WAS! This film has an almost perfect mix of script, acting and effects to keep you thrilled and tense throughout the story. Not only that but it provides a perfect explanation for how the original story began. There are no loose ends and you really get a feeling of "Wow!! THAT'S how it happened!" (I have just dug out the original with Charlton Heston to watch again!)
It also provides you with a very deep understanding of the enmity between the apes and man - in fact, it drives home vividly the desperation of caged animals.
Seeing the protagonist Caesar - the utterly brilliant Andy Serkis - grow from a baby chimp to the leader of the Apes is in itself worth the ticket.
And for those expecting blockbuster action, you won't be disappointed either! The bridge scene and the prior buildup to it must be one of the best choreographed fights I have ever seen on screen - literally mind-blowing...
I could not find a single fault with this film, and came out of the cinema gushing, excited, and elated. SUPERB!!
So again I saw a rating of 8 and thought I might be disappointed.
HOW WRONG I WAS! This film has an almost perfect mix of script, acting and effects to keep you thrilled and tense throughout the story. Not only that but it provides a perfect explanation for how the original story began. There are no loose ends and you really get a feeling of "Wow!! THAT'S how it happened!" (I have just dug out the original with Charlton Heston to watch again!)
It also provides you with a very deep understanding of the enmity between the apes and man - in fact, it drives home vividly the desperation of caged animals.
Seeing the protagonist Caesar - the utterly brilliant Andy Serkis - grow from a baby chimp to the leader of the Apes is in itself worth the ticket.
And for those expecting blockbuster action, you won't be disappointed either! The bridge scene and the prior buildup to it must be one of the best choreographed fights I have ever seen on screen - literally mind-blowing...
I could not find a single fault with this film, and came out of the cinema gushing, excited, and elated. SUPERB!!
Hot Tub Time Machine
(2010)
Worth its weight in bovine excrement!
11 October 2010
I feel duped. I feel wronged. I feel angry. The publicity I heard about this flick was that it was - let me paraphrase - "A great, humorous tribute to 80s comedies". Erm, yeah, right! It MAY have one or two slight smile moments, but in general, it is one huge disappointment. And not just as a "a tribute" to the 80s, but as a whole, as an absolute, as a flick itself.
This, my dear friends, is one hell of a stinker of a movie, and I, for one, feel utterly saddened and disappointed that an actor as great as John Cusack could stoop so low as to commit to this insipid and re-rehashed script.
This doesn't get a zero or a one rating for the mere fact that he is in it and Chevy Chase makes a Luke-warm cameo.
Throw your money, and more importantly, your precious time at this at your own peril.
This, my dear friends, is one hell of a stinker of a movie, and I, for one, feel utterly saddened and disappointed that an actor as great as John Cusack could stoop so low as to commit to this insipid and re-rehashed script.
This doesn't get a zero or a one rating for the mere fact that he is in it and Chevy Chase makes a Luke-warm cameo.
Throw your money, and more importantly, your precious time at this at your own peril.
The Road
(I) (2009)
Gut wrenching and thought provoking
8 February 2010
I'm now becoming increasingly fond of reading harsh reviews of films I think are outstanding before throwing in my own tuppence into the pot. Anyway, I'll address that issue later.
First of all though, THIS FILM GETS YOU, RIGHT IN THE GUTS. I advise anyone with a low threshold to humanity-on-its-edge scenes, ie. the constant threat of cannibalism, to stay away from this.
ON THE OTHER HAND, if you ever really wondered what might happen if some cataclysm hit our planet and there were only a handful of people trying to scrape a living, I strongly recommend this - in my view no other film depicts that struggle so well and so vividly.
Most of it is unutterably dark, but the few moments of light in it within the constant struggle for safety and shelter and food are so uplifting I heard laughter in the cinema.
Who the hell cares why the world we knew went away!? It did! And this is the story of what happens AFTER it goes away, after there is no more fast food or coke or anything.
You're a dad with a ten year old kid - what on Earth do you do? Which lessons can you teach him in this new reality? And almost as important, what can an adult learn from a child in those circumstances.
A gem of a film, if you can stomach the pain in it. But there's a lot of hope in it too. I never read the novella, I want to now. And I think I know it won't have the answers to the quibbling pedants (what went bang? where does the boy go from there?) - but so what!? It isn't about the destination, but all about the journey.
Now, for those - I must say, utterly ignorant - reviewers who see two or three stars' names (in this case, Viggo, Charlize, Duvall and Guy Pearce) and expect a flashy flick, wake up!! There's far, far more to great cinema than bombs, monsters and cops! There's something called acting.
Do you not read even ONE review before going in blind to a film expecting a blockbuster because X or Y actors are in it, only to then trash it in such simplistic and infantile wrath here?!? Excuse my ire, but such great acting, and story, and tension, and visceral cinematography should be recompensed, and not snubbed.
If we ruin this planet, the way it certainly seems we are doing, this film will give you a glimpse of what will surely come after that. And if for nothing else, that is worth seeing.
First of all though, THIS FILM GETS YOU, RIGHT IN THE GUTS. I advise anyone with a low threshold to humanity-on-its-edge scenes, ie. the constant threat of cannibalism, to stay away from this.
ON THE OTHER HAND, if you ever really wondered what might happen if some cataclysm hit our planet and there were only a handful of people trying to scrape a living, I strongly recommend this - in my view no other film depicts that struggle so well and so vividly.
Most of it is unutterably dark, but the few moments of light in it within the constant struggle for safety and shelter and food are so uplifting I heard laughter in the cinema.
Who the hell cares why the world we knew went away!? It did! And this is the story of what happens AFTER it goes away, after there is no more fast food or coke or anything.
You're a dad with a ten year old kid - what on Earth do you do? Which lessons can you teach him in this new reality? And almost as important, what can an adult learn from a child in those circumstances.
A gem of a film, if you can stomach the pain in it. But there's a lot of hope in it too. I never read the novella, I want to now. And I think I know it won't have the answers to the quibbling pedants (what went bang? where does the boy go from there?) - but so what!? It isn't about the destination, but all about the journey.
Now, for those - I must say, utterly ignorant - reviewers who see two or three stars' names (in this case, Viggo, Charlize, Duvall and Guy Pearce) and expect a flashy flick, wake up!! There's far, far more to great cinema than bombs, monsters and cops! There's something called acting.
Do you not read even ONE review before going in blind to a film expecting a blockbuster because X or Y actors are in it, only to then trash it in such simplistic and infantile wrath here?!? Excuse my ire, but such great acting, and story, and tension, and visceral cinematography should be recompensed, and not snubbed.
If we ruin this planet, the way it certainly seems we are doing, this film will give you a glimpse of what will surely come after that. And if for nothing else, that is worth seeing.
The Thing
(1982)
The most perfect alien film ever made...
14 October 2009
From the opening shot and accompanying (and memorably haunting) Morricone score, the scene is set: A helicopter chasing a seemingly innocent dog through the Antarctica wastelands.
And Kurt Russell's (MacReady's) first appearance is also characteristically anarchic and stubborn: calling a computer chess program a "cheating bitch".
This film's plot is spot on. The acting feels real, even with the (now dated) mechanical props. The all-male ensemble cast (with some classic B-role actors acting perhaps their life's roles), the claustrophobic set, the palpable personal tensions between diametrically disparate characters... then add to all that a near-perfect alien entity that melds with whatever it touches. Human or otherwise. One word: Atmosphere! The biggest tribute this film has ever had is that NOBODY has ever had the brains or courage to try a remake or a sequel.
You think of some of the top-rated films here on IMDb - or anywhere really, films that stand by and for themselves, such as Casablanca, Shawshank Redemption, 12 Angry Men, The Usual Suspects.. and you will know that they were great and remain so purely on their own merits.
Well, The Thing is the same. There may be many Star Wars, many Aliens, many Predators... but there is only ONE The Thing.
Why? Because apart from its seamless plot, it has possibly the best ending of any Sci-Fi flick ever made. An ending that's simultaneously so open yet so unequivocally definitive.
Enjoy. This is Carpenter's masterpiece. An utter masterpiece within the horror alien genre.
And Kurt Russell's (MacReady's) first appearance is also characteristically anarchic and stubborn: calling a computer chess program a "cheating bitch".
This film's plot is spot on. The acting feels real, even with the (now dated) mechanical props. The all-male ensemble cast (with some classic B-role actors acting perhaps their life's roles), the claustrophobic set, the palpable personal tensions between diametrically disparate characters... then add to all that a near-perfect alien entity that melds with whatever it touches. Human or otherwise. One word: Atmosphere! The biggest tribute this film has ever had is that NOBODY has ever had the brains or courage to try a remake or a sequel.
You think of some of the top-rated films here on IMDb - or anywhere really, films that stand by and for themselves, such as Casablanca, Shawshank Redemption, 12 Angry Men, The Usual Suspects.. and you will know that they were great and remain so purely on their own merits.
Well, The Thing is the same. There may be many Star Wars, many Aliens, many Predators... but there is only ONE The Thing.
Why? Because apart from its seamless plot, it has possibly the best ending of any Sci-Fi flick ever made. An ending that's simultaneously so open yet so unequivocally definitive.
Enjoy. This is Carpenter's masterpiece. An utter masterpiece within the horror alien genre.
District 9
(2009)
The Sci-fi, Alien genre is reborn!
6 September 2009
Thank you Neill. Thank you Peter.
Neill being the revelation director/writer and Peter being our much-loved LOTR-fame producer.
First of all, let's be clear: this is not your usual, re-hashed, seen-it-before sci-fi flick. It's hardcore, it's heavy and one could (easily) argue it's damned deep.
Having been concocted by a South African, the whole idea is scarily analogous not only to the atrocities of Apartheid, but also carries unsettling echoes of the worst events of WWII, ie. concentration camps and "experiments." It is a vivid and effective indictment of Man's Inhumanity To Man, except it is represented in Man's Inhumanity To Aliens. Oddly, and hats off for pulling this parable off so effectively using ugly aliens, it works magnificently.
I do not want to spoil ANY of the plot, because I really think this is one of those flicks that should be seen ASAP and with as little background noise and info as possible.
It's been said that it works on several levels, it has something for everyone. It's touching, violent, shocking, scary, clever, coherent, original, but above all, throughout it is brilliant.
Not many films make you feel as alive as this one. It makes you cheer for the main characters, human and alien. It makes you think. It makes you sink into your seat with some of its more shocking scenes.
It does take a little while to really get going, but once it does, WOW! It's a non-stop visual and sensory delight! Some scenes were so impacting, I couldn't help myself emitting my audible approval or shock.
I cannot wait for "District 10". Which I hope will materialise one day soon...
Neill being the revelation director/writer and Peter being our much-loved LOTR-fame producer.
First of all, let's be clear: this is not your usual, re-hashed, seen-it-before sci-fi flick. It's hardcore, it's heavy and one could (easily) argue it's damned deep.
Having been concocted by a South African, the whole idea is scarily analogous not only to the atrocities of Apartheid, but also carries unsettling echoes of the worst events of WWII, ie. concentration camps and "experiments." It is a vivid and effective indictment of Man's Inhumanity To Man, except it is represented in Man's Inhumanity To Aliens. Oddly, and hats off for pulling this parable off so effectively using ugly aliens, it works magnificently.
I do not want to spoil ANY of the plot, because I really think this is one of those flicks that should be seen ASAP and with as little background noise and info as possible.
It's been said that it works on several levels, it has something for everyone. It's touching, violent, shocking, scary, clever, coherent, original, but above all, throughout it is brilliant.
Not many films make you feel as alive as this one. It makes you cheer for the main characters, human and alien. It makes you think. It makes you sink into your seat with some of its more shocking scenes.
It does take a little while to really get going, but once it does, WOW! It's a non-stop visual and sensory delight! Some scenes were so impacting, I couldn't help myself emitting my audible approval or shock.
I cannot wait for "District 10". Which I hope will materialise one day soon...
Up
(2009)
Dark, depressing and boring. Up is a Downer!
19 August 2009
The only reason I give this is a 5 is because the short (Partly Cloudy) that preceded "UP" is immensely enjoyable. It is also the highlight of the whole experience.
Up starts with a seemingly cheerful and cute story of boy meets girl. Unbelievably that lasts an entire 5 minutes! Cute story comes to a tragic conclusion and we're left watching a grumpy old man and a retarded fat kid for the rest of this saccharine-infused drudgery.
The funny parts aren't that funny. The bird isn't funny, the dogs aren't, and the retarded kid certainly isn't. One gets smiles, but no belly laughs. Bad guy isn't bad enough. The tension is telegraphed and insipid. The only laughs I heard in the cinema, after the brilliant initial short, came from a 3 year old in front of me, and it was seldom at that. Her bigger sister wasn't laughing. And for anyone older than 5, their brains must seriously be challenged to think any of it more than mildly amusing.
After the hype and the obviously mindless appreciation shown by so many reviewers everywhere, I thought it was time someone set the record straight.
Where's the excitement of The Incredibles, the dialogue of Finding Nemo or the warped humour of Monsters Inc.? Absolutely nowhere to be seen, sadly!
Up starts with a seemingly cheerful and cute story of boy meets girl. Unbelievably that lasts an entire 5 minutes! Cute story comes to a tragic conclusion and we're left watching a grumpy old man and a retarded fat kid for the rest of this saccharine-infused drudgery.
The funny parts aren't that funny. The bird isn't funny, the dogs aren't, and the retarded kid certainly isn't. One gets smiles, but no belly laughs. Bad guy isn't bad enough. The tension is telegraphed and insipid. The only laughs I heard in the cinema, after the brilliant initial short, came from a 3 year old in front of me, and it was seldom at that. Her bigger sister wasn't laughing. And for anyone older than 5, their brains must seriously be challenged to think any of it more than mildly amusing.
After the hype and the obviously mindless appreciation shown by so many reviewers everywhere, I thought it was time someone set the record straight.
Where's the excitement of The Incredibles, the dialogue of Finding Nemo or the warped humour of Monsters Inc.? Absolutely nowhere to be seen, sadly!
Star Trek
(2009)
Familiarity breeds brilliance
24 May 2009
Stardate 2009.05 Star Trek rocks into the 21st century.
First of all, let me state I'm not a trekkie. I grew up on the TV series, and liked it quite a bit, but previous attempts to project it onto the silver screen failed dismally in most cases in my view.
Perhaps it was because the early films insisted on maintaining the original actors, who were mostly past their sell by date by then. Nimoy and Kelley excluded. It was like trying to kick off Batman on the big screen with Adam West and Burt Ward. It was sadly comical and pathetic, if not impossible, to visualise a tough Enterprise crew with beer guts galore and grey hair.
Then in flies this gem, at warp speed, no less!
I do not want to comment on its plot at all, save to say that there IS a brilliant one, and a script to match it.
Neither will I say that this entry has taken special effects to another level. What it does do, however, is exploit today's CGI to the edge, making everything look so beautifully believable and tantalisingly thrilling.
I will, however, say something about the casting: flawless. And the acting is very real. The actors all give their heart, mind and soul in this.
One last thing. Conflict. There's plenty of it, and supplied not only by a superb villain, space battles, and monsters, but there's conflict within and between the characters. All this makes for a fabulous film.
If you're a trekkie, see it. If you're not, see it. If you like sci-fi, see it. If you don't, see it. If you like cinema, see it. If you don't see it.
But do yourself a favour, and do see it. And I want more.
First of all, let me state I'm not a trekkie. I grew up on the TV series, and liked it quite a bit, but previous attempts to project it onto the silver screen failed dismally in most cases in my view.
Perhaps it was because the early films insisted on maintaining the original actors, who were mostly past their sell by date by then. Nimoy and Kelley excluded. It was like trying to kick off Batman on the big screen with Adam West and Burt Ward. It was sadly comical and pathetic, if not impossible, to visualise a tough Enterprise crew with beer guts galore and grey hair.
Then in flies this gem, at warp speed, no less!
I do not want to comment on its plot at all, save to say that there IS a brilliant one, and a script to match it.
Neither will I say that this entry has taken special effects to another level. What it does do, however, is exploit today's CGI to the edge, making everything look so beautifully believable and tantalisingly thrilling.
I will, however, say something about the casting: flawless. And the acting is very real. The actors all give their heart, mind and soul in this.
One last thing. Conflict. There's plenty of it, and supplied not only by a superb villain, space battles, and monsters, but there's conflict within and between the characters. All this makes for a fabulous film.
If you're a trekkie, see it. If you're not, see it. If you like sci-fi, see it. If you don't, see it. If you like cinema, see it. If you don't see it.
But do yourself a favour, and do see it. And I want more.
The Mist
(2007)
Sublimely human sci-fi horror
21 February 2009
I have read a lot of Stephen King, and I have seen a lot of cinematic adaptations of his work.
When these are done well, they are masterpieces or at the very least, far above average films. Into this category I'd happily throw in The Shawshank Redemption, The Green Mile, Stand By Me, The Shining, Dreamcatcher, The Dead Zone and possibly one or two others, Pet Sematary and Cujo.
When adaptations are done with sub-standard actors or direction, the on-screen effect can be dismal or outright laughable. In this category, led by The Stand and It, there are sadly too many to contemplate. 1408 is an exception here, in that it had a great cast and a budget, but misses its mark. So I was delighted when I watched this new offering from King (the novella upon which it's based is top of my list to read now, and the notion that it inspired "Silent Hill" has only made me feel more awed at King's mind) and the writer/director that gave us Shawshank and Mile.
THE MIST...
Is ominous and haunting from beginning to bitter end. I'm shocked that this film has received such a high rating on IMDb (7.4 at time of writing) given that most audiences do not like bitter ends. And that is all I shall say about this film's finale, which is nothing if not psychologically disturbing and chilling.
And despite this ending being different to that in the novella (which I have read about), it is nevertheless very much in keeping with the King style. To me, it even adds to the sense of lunacy, desperation and unforgiving tension which the story offers.
The story, in which a mysterious, monstrously murderous mist envelops a small US town, is told with admirable restraint: a welcome quality in any effective horror film, by which a film allows the fear inside the viewer to fester and grow, aided by his own imagination. Apart from one or two contrived visual frights, the scenes with monsters in the fog, as well as those of people attempting to brave the killer mist, are incredibly tense.
Screams don't come when you expect them. Deaths are gruesome and aplenty, and though on the lower end of the gore scale, the human reaction to death in its various forms here makes them more realistic. The creatures, partially hidden by the mist, seem more terrifying than if seen in any other weather or time of day. The mist intensifies the sense of uncertainty, and in some cases enhances the mind-blowing magnitude of the monsters.
The monsters themselves, and in particular the bellowing bony behemoth at the end, are superbly and imaginatively crafted. Their presence, which grows throughout the film in both volume and size induces the fear one would expect from one's worst nightmares. Some of them come across graphically as intensely other-worldly as I have seen on screen.
The acting in general is superb and for a horror film, surprisingly human. Characters are shown to have not just fears, but intelligence, love, loyalty, madness, friendship, anger, faith, courage, stupidity, violence... at the first sign of a "monster," the characters actually debate whether telling others what they have seen is worth it, given how unbelievable it is. The paranoia and ignorance of the small-town mentality is also scarily exposed, latching onto medieval beliefs in their hour of darkness. As is the general question of whether Man should play with things he does not understand (an issue that was also intriguingly raised in Jurassic Park).
The film is nearly a perfect sci-fi horror: it even pays tribute early on to John Carpenter and The Thing, which is, to my mind, still the best in this genre. The last lines of Childs and MacReady in The Thing are echoed in this film (Childs: "What do we do now?" MacReady: "Why don't we just wait here for a little while... see what happens..." - In The Mist Drayton says: "Let's uh... see how far the... the fuel takes us, huh?" And those could have made a very different, though equally pleasing, end to this flick).
I watched this film yesterday evening, and 24 hours later, I have it running around my head still, in particular its brutal ending, with its eerie music, that gargantuan creature, and the unearthly freakish noise it makes.
My hat off to the writer and director, who eschews a happy ending for a truly horrific one. If an Apocalypse ever comes - I pray it is nothing like this one. A must-see for horror and sci-fi fans.
When these are done well, they are masterpieces or at the very least, far above average films. Into this category I'd happily throw in The Shawshank Redemption, The Green Mile, Stand By Me, The Shining, Dreamcatcher, The Dead Zone and possibly one or two others, Pet Sematary and Cujo.
When adaptations are done with sub-standard actors or direction, the on-screen effect can be dismal or outright laughable. In this category, led by The Stand and It, there are sadly too many to contemplate. 1408 is an exception here, in that it had a great cast and a budget, but misses its mark. So I was delighted when I watched this new offering from King (the novella upon which it's based is top of my list to read now, and the notion that it inspired "Silent Hill" has only made me feel more awed at King's mind) and the writer/director that gave us Shawshank and Mile.
THE MIST...
Is ominous and haunting from beginning to bitter end. I'm shocked that this film has received such a high rating on IMDb (7.4 at time of writing) given that most audiences do not like bitter ends. And that is all I shall say about this film's finale, which is nothing if not psychologically disturbing and chilling.
And despite this ending being different to that in the novella (which I have read about), it is nevertheless very much in keeping with the King style. To me, it even adds to the sense of lunacy, desperation and unforgiving tension which the story offers.
The story, in which a mysterious, monstrously murderous mist envelops a small US town, is told with admirable restraint: a welcome quality in any effective horror film, by which a film allows the fear inside the viewer to fester and grow, aided by his own imagination. Apart from one or two contrived visual frights, the scenes with monsters in the fog, as well as those of people attempting to brave the killer mist, are incredibly tense.
Screams don't come when you expect them. Deaths are gruesome and aplenty, and though on the lower end of the gore scale, the human reaction to death in its various forms here makes them more realistic. The creatures, partially hidden by the mist, seem more terrifying than if seen in any other weather or time of day. The mist intensifies the sense of uncertainty, and in some cases enhances the mind-blowing magnitude of the monsters.
The monsters themselves, and in particular the bellowing bony behemoth at the end, are superbly and imaginatively crafted. Their presence, which grows throughout the film in both volume and size induces the fear one would expect from one's worst nightmares. Some of them come across graphically as intensely other-worldly as I have seen on screen.
The acting in general is superb and for a horror film, surprisingly human. Characters are shown to have not just fears, but intelligence, love, loyalty, madness, friendship, anger, faith, courage, stupidity, violence... at the first sign of a "monster," the characters actually debate whether telling others what they have seen is worth it, given how unbelievable it is. The paranoia and ignorance of the small-town mentality is also scarily exposed, latching onto medieval beliefs in their hour of darkness. As is the general question of whether Man should play with things he does not understand (an issue that was also intriguingly raised in Jurassic Park).
The film is nearly a perfect sci-fi horror: it even pays tribute early on to John Carpenter and The Thing, which is, to my mind, still the best in this genre. The last lines of Childs and MacReady in The Thing are echoed in this film (Childs: "What do we do now?" MacReady: "Why don't we just wait here for a little while... see what happens..." - In The Mist Drayton says: "Let's uh... see how far the... the fuel takes us, huh?" And those could have made a very different, though equally pleasing, end to this flick).
I watched this film yesterday evening, and 24 hours later, I have it running around my head still, in particular its brutal ending, with its eerie music, that gargantuan creature, and the unearthly freakish noise it makes.
My hat off to the writer and director, who eschews a happy ending for a truly horrific one. If an Apocalypse ever comes - I pray it is nothing like this one. A must-see for horror and sci-fi fans.
The Incredible Hulk
(2008)
Why does Hollywood think they can get away with it?
4 December 2008
I would have given this effort a 7 or possibly an 8, were it not for the fact that when the film is supposed to be being shot in Brazilian favelas (slums), they speak anything BUT Brazilian Portuguese there. Why????
As Hollywood enters an era of ever-increasing tangible realism (cf. the latest Bond films. Hmmm, the guy is human, cries and gets bruises), why oh why would a multi-million slick production of Hulk skimp on authenticity when it would be so so easy to attain it? The initial scenes in Brazil rang as hollow as a cheap production of an NYC gangster film with the "Family" characters sounding Mexican instead of Italian. WHY!?!?
Apart from this annoying and glaring, gaping error, this version of the Hulk strikes a much better tone than the 2003 attempt. It is short on humour but big on heart, and absolutely huge on sequel potential.
I can't wait for said potential to materialise. But only if they treat the audience with respect and don't cut (silly) corners.
As Hollywood enters an era of ever-increasing tangible realism (cf. the latest Bond films. Hmmm, the guy is human, cries and gets bruises), why oh why would a multi-million slick production of Hulk skimp on authenticity when it would be so so easy to attain it? The initial scenes in Brazil rang as hollow as a cheap production of an NYC gangster film with the "Family" characters sounding Mexican instead of Italian. WHY!?!?
Apart from this annoying and glaring, gaping error, this version of the Hulk strikes a much better tone than the 2003 attempt. It is short on humour but big on heart, and absolutely huge on sequel potential.
I can't wait for said potential to materialise. But only if they treat the audience with respect and don't cut (silly) corners.
10,000 BC
(2008)
10,000 SF, not BC! This is Science-Fiction!
8 September 2008
Warning: Spoilers
If I could vote below a 1 out of 10, I would.
I would give it a 0.5 out of 10 based solely on a decent-looking bird (Camilla Belle) and 3 special effects sequences containing the following:
The "Mammoth" scene - those big woolly elephants that lived from the Pliocene epoch from 4.8 million years ago to around 4,500 years ago.
The "Gastornis" scene - those over-sized carnivorous ostrich-like flightless birds that lived from 34 million years ago to around 100,000 years ago.
The Sabre-toothed tiger (ludicrously over-sized in the film) scene - an overgrown "big cat" that lived between approximately 2.5 million to 10,000 years ago.
Those are ALL extinct fossilised species found in Europe, and South or North America.
English-speaking man didn't really make it there until MAYBE 2,000 years ago.
Given the attempt of the film to promote the fact that tribes of different people existed (most of which seemed at times African, at times Aboriginal in appearance), this falsehood just does not stand up.
They'd have done better going the Mel Gibson, Apocalypto, way. That is, no English dialogue.
But the ENTIRE film crumbles laughably when the pyramids in the desert concept is introduced.
Fit of Laughter Number One: Pyramids, specially those that seem to be set (in the film) in Egypt, or near some desert's delta, did not come about until 2,600 BC. End of that little lie.
Belly Cackle Number Two: The Woolly Mammoth depicted in this excuse for a film ONLY lived in Northern, and VERY COLD climates. It is unheard of as A) ever been found near a desert, as depicted in this trash, or B) ever being known to be even remotely domesticated by Man.
Roland and his co-writer must have needed the cash. I am utterly sorry that I gave them a single cent.
I would give it a 0.5 out of 10 based solely on a decent-looking bird (Camilla Belle) and 3 special effects sequences containing the following:
The "Mammoth" scene - those big woolly elephants that lived from the Pliocene epoch from 4.8 million years ago to around 4,500 years ago.
The "Gastornis" scene - those over-sized carnivorous ostrich-like flightless birds that lived from 34 million years ago to around 100,000 years ago.
The Sabre-toothed tiger (ludicrously over-sized in the film) scene - an overgrown "big cat" that lived between approximately 2.5 million to 10,000 years ago.
Those are ALL extinct fossilised species found in Europe, and South or North America.
English-speaking man didn't really make it there until MAYBE 2,000 years ago.
Given the attempt of the film to promote the fact that tribes of different people existed (most of which seemed at times African, at times Aboriginal in appearance), this falsehood just does not stand up.
They'd have done better going the Mel Gibson, Apocalypto, way. That is, no English dialogue.
But the ENTIRE film crumbles laughably when the pyramids in the desert concept is introduced.
Fit of Laughter Number One: Pyramids, specially those that seem to be set (in the film) in Egypt, or near some desert's delta, did not come about until 2,600 BC. End of that little lie.
Belly Cackle Number Two: The Woolly Mammoth depicted in this excuse for a film ONLY lived in Northern, and VERY COLD climates. It is unheard of as A) ever been found near a desert, as depicted in this trash, or B) ever being known to be even remotely domesticated by Man.
Roland and his co-writer must have needed the cash. I am utterly sorry that I gave them a single cent.
In Bruges
(2008)
I feel I want to go to Bruges...
18 July 2008
Pick some excellent actors, add a superb and unpredictable plot, mix in some believable dialogue and odd, yet completely realistic situations, and then set almost the entire film in a haunting yet mesmerising location most of us have never been to, some never even heard of.
The film "In Brujes" is many things. It is extremely endearing, gory, violent, funny, tender, but most of all it is a compellingly human film. It charts a handful of days in the lives of two hired killers, after a job in London goes wrong, and they are sent to "cool off and lay low" in a rather unexpected place: Brujes, Belgium.
The reason they are sent there becomes apparent once we have already been drawn well into the plot, and have developed empathy for the main characters, which makes everything that happens to them in the final act all the more resonant.
Without spoiling it, as I believe this film is one of the least predictable ones I have seen in years, the reason they are sent to this little-known place (in Cinema, at least) partly involves the fact that "Brujes is like a fairy tale city".
Since I dearly treasure the feeling of going to the cinema and being pleasantly surprised throughout the length of a film, both by its quality acting and original plot, I shall simply tell you that I was amused and laughed throughout, I felt pity, I felt pain, I felt hope. I felt.
And I now feel I want to see this city. Because both it, and this film, have something of a fairytale about them. Honestly, miss this gem at your peril.
The film "In Brujes" is many things. It is extremely endearing, gory, violent, funny, tender, but most of all it is a compellingly human film. It charts a handful of days in the lives of two hired killers, after a job in London goes wrong, and they are sent to "cool off and lay low" in a rather unexpected place: Brujes, Belgium.
The reason they are sent there becomes apparent once we have already been drawn well into the plot, and have developed empathy for the main characters, which makes everything that happens to them in the final act all the more resonant.
Without spoiling it, as I believe this film is one of the least predictable ones I have seen in years, the reason they are sent to this little-known place (in Cinema, at least) partly involves the fact that "Brujes is like a fairy tale city".
Since I dearly treasure the feeling of going to the cinema and being pleasantly surprised throughout the length of a film, both by its quality acting and original plot, I shall simply tell you that I was amused and laughed throughout, I felt pity, I felt pain, I felt hope. I felt.
And I now feel I want to see this city. Because both it, and this film, have something of a fairytale about them. Honestly, miss this gem at your peril.
Sleuth
(2007)
Sad to see Law and Caine in this travesty
21 June 2008
Warning: Spoilers
86 wasted minutes of my life. I fell asleep the first time I attempted watching it, and I must say I'm not one to ever fall asleep in the cinema.
I have never seen such a pointless plot acted in such a stilted and forced manner, and can only surmise that the actors were as hard-up as the protagonist writer allegedly was in the film itself.
Everything in this dire adaptation is overacted. And if it isn't the wooden acting, almost as though you can see the teleprompter, then the set itself, which is overlit and interfering in utterly unnecessary ways, and overdressed to an unimaginable extent, is enough to put you off the entire farce.
As to the supposed shock of a detective under disguise, any person who does not see that - as well as the entire rest of this ludicrous plot - telegraphed light years in advance, should check their eyesight immediately.
Bad acting, and from two very decent actors, coupled with the hyper-coddled Branagh trademark overdirection, is enough to make you want to use real bullets rather than blanks yourself.
On top of it all, there is a completely risible undertone of homoerotica in this, heightened towards the end of it. All I can hope for is that this was such a flop that people shan't try to emulate this level of cinema ever again.
I have never seen such a pointless plot acted in such a stilted and forced manner, and can only surmise that the actors were as hard-up as the protagonist writer allegedly was in the film itself.
Everything in this dire adaptation is overacted. And if it isn't the wooden acting, almost as though you can see the teleprompter, then the set itself, which is overlit and interfering in utterly unnecessary ways, and overdressed to an unimaginable extent, is enough to put you off the entire farce.
As to the supposed shock of a detective under disguise, any person who does not see that - as well as the entire rest of this ludicrous plot - telegraphed light years in advance, should check their eyesight immediately.
Bad acting, and from two very decent actors, coupled with the hyper-coddled Branagh trademark overdirection, is enough to make you want to use real bullets rather than blanks yourself.
On top of it all, there is a completely risible undertone of homoerotica in this, heightened towards the end of it. All I can hope for is that this was such a flop that people shan't try to emulate this level of cinema ever again.
Disastrous boring mess of a finale
28 May 2007
After 30 minutes I and the people I'd gone to see POTC3 with were completely lost. Incidentally, we had greatly enjoyed POTC1 and thought POTC2 wasn't too bad for a sequel.
After 1hr 30 minutes, I suggested leaving the cinema. Sadly I was voted down. And had to agonise and suffer for another 1hr 30 minutes.
The film is shocking in its lack of plot, lack of character development, repetitious special effects (nothing new since the 1st and 2nd films), complete lack of humour (after 2 hours my friends and I laughed, and one said "finally", as in finally a good joke!), and again, complete lack of plot, story, sense, direction.
I have not felt that I have lost 3 hours of my life in the cinema for a very long time. I only ever walked out of 2 films in my life. This should have been the third. AVOID!
After 1hr 30 minutes, I suggested leaving the cinema. Sadly I was voted down. And had to agonise and suffer for another 1hr 30 minutes.
The film is shocking in its lack of plot, lack of character development, repetitious special effects (nothing new since the 1st and 2nd films), complete lack of humour (after 2 hours my friends and I laughed, and one said "finally", as in finally a good joke!), and again, complete lack of plot, story, sense, direction.
I have not felt that I have lost 3 hours of my life in the cinema for a very long time. I only ever walked out of 2 films in my life. This should have been the third. AVOID!
Batman Begins
(2005)
Long live Batman!
4 August 2005
Having grown up loving Batman, and having seen the previous films, I can honestly say that I'm now dying for the sequel! The final scene lays out the HUGE potential of this dark crusader as an inspiring fighter for the truth and good confronted with dark times.
After plasticky, stylised, pseudo-Gothic, and downright camp, we get to the REAL, DARK, VERY BELIEVABLE Batman. For the comic's fans it's a rare pleasure, to see Batman rise out of the ashes like a Phoenix and walk Gotham as it always should have been. Much has been made of its reality. Let me tell you, it's all true. Aside from the utterly solid cast, the choice of villains, the set, the action, it is all spot on.
Though different, this sets you up like Star Wars did for Empire, T1 for T2, let's hope the powers that be are never tempted to go for the quick buck. Thought was put into this film. Pure enjoyment is the end product. Skeptical fan delighted to be proved wrong urges you to see this whole new start to an age-old story.
You may as well pretend the previous 4 Batmans never happened, sorry Keaton... But this is where it all starts!
After plasticky, stylised, pseudo-Gothic, and downright camp, we get to the REAL, DARK, VERY BELIEVABLE Batman. For the comic's fans it's a rare pleasure, to see Batman rise out of the ashes like a Phoenix and walk Gotham as it always should have been. Much has been made of its reality. Let me tell you, it's all true. Aside from the utterly solid cast, the choice of villains, the set, the action, it is all spot on.
Though different, this sets you up like Star Wars did for Empire, T1 for T2, let's hope the powers that be are never tempted to go for the quick buck. Thought was put into this film. Pure enjoyment is the end product. Skeptical fan delighted to be proved wrong urges you to see this whole new start to an age-old story.
You may as well pretend the previous 4 Batmans never happened, sorry Keaton... But this is where it all starts!
Tell Your Friends