Change Your Image
kellcooz
Reviews
Resident Evil 4 (2023)
Amazing replication of the 2005 masterpiece with it's own timeless charm
Amazing replication of the 2005 masterpiece with it's own timeless charm. Just like the 2005 nostalgic gem and game changer, this 2023 remake will also withstand the test of time. While it's narrative is more grounded and serious than the 2005 game, it still retains most of it's quality B-Movie fun. There are still cheesy dialogues and very memorable in their own right. The atmosphere is just as amazing, with greater emphasis on horror and very intense moments, as well as sections that still give you a false sense of security. The audio effects are great in their own right, including that of reloading guns. The 2023 remake adds 2 very nice features to distinguish itself from the 2005 original, and that's stealth and parrying, both of which deliver with amazing fun results. The 3rd person combat is as fluid as ever, Leon's story campaign lasting around the same 8-12 hours, Ada's story section adding another 4-6 hours of content (a big improvement from the original), and the still always fun Mercenaries Mode. All these features easily makes Resident Evil 4 Remake (just like the original) one of the greatest games ever many times over.
Biohazard 4 (2005)
Still an amazing masterpiece with timeless charm
Still an amazing masterpiece with timeless charm after all these years. A true nostalgic gem and game changer, which will always withstand the test of time. While it's narrative may not be the best, it's still nonetheless, memorable and quality B-Movie fun. With by far the most memorable and cheesy dialogue that video games has to offer. The atmosphere is amazing, dark and tense at times, while brighter sections give you a false sense of security. In addition, the most memorable audio effects, especially that of reloading guns. What will always standout for Resident Evil 4 (2005), is the innovative and revolutionary gameplay mechanics. With fluid 3rd person combat, Leon's story campaign lasting 8-12 hours, Ada's story section adding another 2-3 hours of extra content, and the always fun Mercenaries Mode. All these features which easily makes Resident Evil 4 (2005) one of the greatest games ever many times over.
The Sinking City (2019)
A turning point for Frogwares
The game has a huge open world city setting, but with large sections that have nothing to interact with. I initially found this frustrating at first. However, once I figured out how the case-and-address system worked, it started to make more sense.
The story starts off quite slow, but is actually pretty good once it gets going. There are a couple of meaningful choices, of which one or two feel a bit forced, but overall add to the experience.
The game's mechanics (combat, sixth sense, etc.) are very simple, but integrated well enough.
The game is also a turning point for Frogwares in wanting to make games with action, open world setting, and horror elements, since both Sherlock Holmes Chapter One & The Awakened remake also carried elements from this game.
The Sinking City is also getting a SEQUEL, which itself is a pleasant surprise, and it seems this is a series Frogwares will enjoy growing in the coming years.
Alone in the Dark (2008)
Potential great game ruined by too many styles and ideas mixed in
This game had amazing innovative ideas that were just poorly executed and handled. It was the result of too many ideas and styles mixed in, and I feel the game would've fared better had they stuck to just one perspective (either 1st person or 3rd person OTS). The game's story is unfortunately not that good and suffers from poor pacing despite having an engaging atmosphere and setting. The driving controls were atrocious, you barely have any control on the car which feels either slippery, sluggish or unresponsive. The melee combat is very awkward and it's quite hard to describe even when shown in video, because when picking up a weapon (I used letter E), Carnby's attack stance and movement (the arms) is controlled by the mouse, like ala motion controller. It was hard to control because the 3rd person camera is tied to the direction keys (WASD), while you're trying to direct, ala motion controller again, the arm swing animation and attack (press left click) by moving the mouse around. It made for exploring and traversing (especially in platform sections) very difficult. The only time the game controlled well was during 1st person aiming with gun, where camera control is tied to mouse, while using WASD to move. It's another of those awful PC ports where button prompts are console instead of PC prompts. Alone in the Dark 2008 has easily one of the worst PC ports I've ever seen alongside Silent Hill Homecoming and Splinter Cell Double Agent.
Alone in the Dark: The New Nightmare (2001)
What might have been....
While the 1992 original is a pioneer of survival horror games, this 2001 reboot is the first modern game in the series. The story, characters, setting and atmosphere are all on point and very engaging. The game has serious flaws though like re-spawning enemies, some very confusing & cryptic puzzles, and the boss fights were at times confusing and frustrating to handle as well due to their puzzle-like sequence. Even so, I enjoyed New Nightmare for what it is, and it was suppose to be the beginning of another trilogy, but those plans got scrapped, which is unfortunate. I feel the series would've been in far better shape had they just proceeded with the New Nightmare reboot trilogy. The 2008 game and 2015 Illumination were so bad, they virtually killed the series. So, it's an amazing miracle that Alone in the Dark 2024 got made which is now possibly the best game in the series thanks to modern gameplay & graphics, and being a faithful & respectful homage to the 1992 original.
Alone in the Dark (2024)
Despite mixed reception, AITD 2024 still a step in the right direction
Given how mishandled and mismanaged the Alone in the Dark series has been in it's 30+ years of existence (looking at you especially, 2008 game & 2015 Illumination), it's a miracle a much better game still got made. This 2024 remake / reboot / re-imagining pays homage and is very faithful & respectful to the 1992 classic original's spirit and flavor with modern gameplay & graphics. I've finished the game 7 times (4 as Edward, 3 as Emily), and the game's story, characters, atmosphere & 1920s rural Gothic noir setting are very alluring and engaging. Not overly familiar with either David Harbour or Jodie Comer, but they played their respective protagonist roles brilliantly.
Combat is no doubt inferior when compared to recent Resident Evil games, but still serviceable and enjoyable. Graphics and animation is often ridiculed as "PS3-era" quality, which I don't see as a negative given this is a "AA" game with far less budget compared to recent Resident Evil games or Alan Wake 2, and many games for the PS2 and PS3 eras still look great even now. Another criticism I find odd is the game being "too short", when majority of action or survival horror games tend to clock between 6-12 hours of story & gameplay. I spent 8 hours as Edward and just under 7 hours as Emily in most of my playthroughs. So it was time well spent for me. No inventory managing as well any sort of health or weapon upgrades is no doubt glaring shortcomings. But given it's limited AA budget, I guess more emphasis in AITD 2024 was placed in story telling, characters, atmosphere, setting locations, and visuals.
As for the step in the right direction, you have to look no further than the last 2 games prior to 2024 Alone in the Dark... 2008 game and Illumination. 2008 game had potential, but is a jumbled mess with too many styles and ideas mixed in like a certain Resident Evil 6 but much worse. As for Illumination, I've no clue why they greenlited such a game in the first place. It's just so bad, it seemed to effectively bury the series for good. So it's simply a pleasant surprise to see THQ Nordic revive this long forgotten franchise, especially when it's the pioneer of survival horror games. The same can be said for Outcast's revival (with "A New Beginning"), which is the pioneer for open world games. The latest Alone in the Dark does a lot of things right despite the glaring flaws, that it's provided a solid modern foundation in reviving the series going forward. I feel optimistic it will grow an audience in due time, since many gamers are always on the look out for an alternative to Resident Evil, and Alone in the Dark 2024 will deliver on that craving. It's just wonderful to see Alone in the Dark back with a great game that will serve as an ideal entry point for newcomers to the series.
Napoleon (2023)
This 'Napoleon' movie will be very disappointing to fans of epic historical period films
I'm not very knowledgeable about Napoleonic history, but I read a review of the movie today that I wanted to share. It seemed entirely reasonable, and since I'm reluctant to spend money on Hollyweird productions, it encouraged me to stay away from the theater for this one, too. Here it is:
This is my review of the new Napoleon movie. Before I begin, let me say I studied the Napoleonic Era extensively and am very familiar with it. I neither hate Napoleon nor love him, so I judge this film objectively.
Let's start with the basics. Many of my initial fears about the film were correct. The rise of Napoleon and his reign encompass far too many events to do justice in a 2 1/2 hour movie. The film 'Waterloo' covers simply the Battle of Waterloo and is 2 hours long - this allows it to fully flesh out the event and characters.
Trying to fit 15+ years into one movie is very difficult. 'Napoleon' tries to do too much too fast and is rushed. It jumps through each notable event of Napoleon's life in quick succession, and this doesn't give the proper detail or buildup these moments need. It sucks out their intensity, drama, and weight. Yet still, important aspects of Napoleon's reign like his internal reforms to France and his relationship with Catholicism are left unexplored.
'Napoleon' also does a very bad job displaying the charisma and energy that the real life Napoleon had. Napoleon, for all his faults, was a leader who inspired real devotion from his men. This leadership ability is never given proper representation in the film. Instead, it's the opposite. Napoleon is mostly shown as a low energy weirdo. It leaves you wondering how he even became emperor. The film really goes out of its way to make Napoleon more awkward and... bizarre than he really was.
Another drawback of the film is how it puts massively disproportionate emphasis on Napoleon's relationship with his first wife Josephine. While Josephine was a large part of Napoleon's life, the film makes it seem like he was completely obsessed with her. In reality, Napoleon frequently cheated on her and divorced her when he felt like it. I assume that the film's outsized emphasis on Josephine is Hollywood's way of rewriting history to give women more importance in this time period.
Then we have historical inaccuracies, which could get their own thread. I'll mention two of the most egregious. Movie Napoleon shoots the Egyptian pyramids with cannons, which never happened. The Battle of Austerlitz has the Austrians and Russians walk into an obvious trap in a giant frozen gulch. In the real battle, they took the high ground on a strategic hill.
All in all, 'Napoleon' will be very disappointing to fans of this epic historical period. Like many films today, the creators were just going through the motions rather than trying to create a work of art that will be remembered for generations. Frankly, I'm surprised Hollywood didn't do more to glorify Napoleon. In the long run, Napoleon's reign spread liberal reforms through Europe and weakened the continent's traditional ruling structures (monarchy, aristocracy, Church). Plutocrats like those in Hollywood would've loved Napoleon's rule. I suppose despite this, he was still too 'nationalist' for them. Oh well, I won't interrupt my enemy when they're making a mistake.
Captain Marvel (2019)
Perfect example of modern Hollywood female empowerment
According to modern Hollywood female empowerment...
- A woman can never lose a fight to a man
- A woman can never lose an argument to a man
- A woman can never need help from a man
- A woman can never be less intelligent than a man
- A woman can never be corrected by a man
Seriously, any Studio Ghibli movie alone blows this crap out of the water.
She is absolutely not a realistic and relatable strong female character for several reasons:
1. During her derby race as a kid, she really did need to slow down on the turns. But because she was immature, she ended up nearly break in her neck from bad judgement. Her dad, who not only let her race but also most likely helped her practice, yelled at her for good reason. "You don't belong out there!" Translation: "If you are going to be reckless, you don't need to be doing this."
2. The group of men mocking her on the obstacle course are heckling her to motivate her. Has no one seen a military movie before? Has no one hung out with a group of men before? EVERYBODY gets heckled and mocked in training, because it's character building. Tough Love. If she was so immature and self-victimizing to realize that she was not the only person being verbally harassed, she doesn't belong in the military.
3. The message of her being "too emotional" is a jab at women being more empathetic and verbally high context. She is not emotional! She is overly sensitive and incapable of taking criticism. That's not emotionality!
4. I have had far more criticism and bullying from other women growing up. I could count on one hand how many times I was bullied by a man on one hand. Half of them were just off color jokes that went too far, and the others was one particular boy who was obnoxious.
5. She is sooooo arrogant! I cringe internally and externally any time she makes an executive decision. Legitimately, if she were a man acting that way, that character would still be a massive jerk. My best example isn't from this movie but in End Game when she tells Rocket from Guardians od the Galaxy, "Earth isn't the only planet that needs help." Oh, really, Cpt Meh-vel? You're going to to tell the person who has literally been traveling the universe helping different planets, too? This is why mansplaining is not a thing.
Major League (1989)
Cleveland INDIANS always
One of the best sports movies ever, and a timeless 1980s classic. The pacing, story, atmosphere, characters, all hit the right notes in making this a fun movie to watch and with solid replay value. Simply a great watch overall. ;-)
10/10.
Jurassic World Dominion (2022)
One of those movies that makes it hard to turn your brain off to enjoy
Movies like this sure love to remove basic common sense. The story is pure nonsense, since from the previous horrible movie (Fallen Kingdom) there were just like a handful of dinosaurs, along with that stupid "THEY'RE ALIVE, JUST LIKE ME" moment. That character's logic makes no sense, and I really don't like her because what she did is the sole reason for the problematic and dumb setting of this latest and "last" Jurassic movie (Dominion) to exist. Do the writers really expect people to believe that the governments and armed forces worldwide allowed these extremely dangerous creatures to just go about freely and multiply? Just absolute zero sense.
When movies decide to eliminate basic common sense on the human characters just for cheap jump scares and plot ARMOR devices, it takes so much away and make them less or not worth endearing.
The Call of the Wild (2020)
Sad people are defending the unrealistc CGI Dog
If you enjoyed the movie, good more power to you. But still.....
Why are people defending the unnecessary CGI dog? Are you that stupid? They should've just made this into a FULL CGI animated movie instead of "live action." BTW... Lion King 2019 is NOT live action, when ALL the animals talk HUMAN TALK and photo-realistic CGI is still CGI. Can't believe something like this has to be debated in this day and age. This 2020 Call of the Wild movie is no different from Who Framed Roger Rabbit (1988), Cool World (1992) or Space Jam (1996)... REAL people interacting with CARTOON characters. The CGI dog is very much a cartoon character, which makes much of the sequence in the movie implausible, unrealistic, and impossible. Case Closed.
Justice League (2017)
The result of rushing and competing with Marvel
What a marvelous way to introduce several other DC Superhero characters w/o having made 1-3 individual origin movies for each of them first. Superman only had one (Man of Steel), while Batman Vs. Superman was a messy continuation and reintroduction for Batman (Batman Begins, Dark Knight, and Dark Knight rises were a completely different Batman). Wonder Woman only had one, and it takes place years before the events of Justice League. Flash and Cyborg don't have an origin movie yet, while Aquaman got his well after release of trashy Justice League movie. Warner Brothers was so impatient in trying to rush and compete with Marvel, and this is the result... one of the dumbest movies ever conceived. They should focus in producing 1-3 origin movies for each individual DC Superhero (Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, Aquaman, Flash, etc...), before finally rebooting for another Justice league movie. Stop competing with Marvel, for they patiently setup their cinematic universe, while Warner Brothers couldn't wait building theirs for at least 5 years.
Extraction (2020)
10/10 despite razor thin story and inaccurate portrayals of Dhaka and Bangladeshi people
What a freaking crazy movie. Just by the tremendous body count, it's seems like Hemsworth & Co. took on the entire Bangladeshi police force and army, with a good portion of Dhaka suffering considerable collateral damage. The story maybe razor thin, and the portrayals of Dhaka and Bangladeshi people inaccurate, it's still a 10/10 for tremendous level of enjoyment. Nice to see another big budget Hollywood action movie set in the South Asia region again. ;-)
The Gentlemen (2019)
It's not bad, just kinda OVERRATED
7.5 / 10
Labeled and marketed as "ACTION CRIME COMEDY" when 95% of the movie is just boring TALKIE TALK TALK. It's not bad, just kinda OVERRATED. My old man himself found the movie BORING, and that's coming from someone who likes gritty crime movies. This unfortunately didn't meet his standard (like Dirty Harry, The Godfather, The Untouchables, Good Fellas, Kill The Irishman, We Own The Night, etc..).
Lots of Guy Ritchie fanboys are defending this really boring movie. What's so great about a movie filled with almost nothing but exposition this, and exposition that? The Godfather 1 & 2 and Good Fellas did such stuff way better. Many of the build ups in this movie get nowhere or take too long. There's hardly any action, and I even find the slow paced 1940's & 1950's Crime Noir movies far more engaging to watch.