Search
Search results
Ethan Embry recommended Oldboy (2003) in Movies (curated)
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated Planet of the Apes (2001) in Movies
Jan 13, 2021
Not The Bad
This Remake/Reboot of Planet of the Apes isnt that bad. The action is good, the acting is good, the sci-fi is good. Its that ending that made no sense. Im not sure why people didnt like this film, that its one of the worst remake's/reboots of all time. Its not their are others remakes/reboots that are worst than this.
The plot: Astronaut Leo Davidson whips through space and time to a world where apes and gorillas rule the humans. Captured, he is nurtured by Ari and hunted by General Thade as he leads a rebel group of humans and chimpanzees in search of his downed craft. This is his only hope of escape and, ironically, the planet's only hope of shaking off the tyranny of the gorillas, allowing peaceful humans and chimpanzees to co-exist.
I think its a good film.
The plot: Astronaut Leo Davidson whips through space and time to a world where apes and gorillas rule the humans. Captured, he is nurtured by Ari and hunted by General Thade as he leads a rebel group of humans and chimpanzees in search of his downed craft. This is his only hope of escape and, ironically, the planet's only hope of shaking off the tyranny of the gorillas, allowing peaceful humans and chimpanzees to co-exist.
I think its a good film.
iTouchScreen Camera
Entertainment and Games
App
One of the best Entertainment apps out there !!! Seriously funny !!! Disclaimer: This app does not...
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Evil Dead (2013) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
One of the greatest horror movies of all time would have to be “The Evil Dead” which had been spawned by Sam Raimi and his original short film “Within the Woods”. “Within the Woods” was filmed with the intent of gaining investors to collaborate on a full length film starring the then unknown God of “B” horror movies Bruce Campbell. “The Evil Dead” and its predecessor “Within the Woods” was meant to be serious and horrifying, though that proved to be hard with a smaller budget that Raimi and Campbell had originally hoped for. Little did they know that Evil Dead would become one of the largest trilogies in cult film histories.
Based on Raimi’s original 1981 script, five young adult friends set out on a short vacation in a remote cabin in the woods. Whilst reading from a book that was obviously supposed to stay hidden, one of them ends up summoning dormant demons that end up causing havoc among the group. Killing them off one by one. Though the aura of the film is somewhat similar to the original, we all know that with remakes there are always some differences. In the original the five friends go to a cabin for a care free fun filled weekend the remake centers around one friend trying to kick her drug habits “cold turkey” with the help of her three friends and older brother.
The cinematography of the film is one hundred times better (remember in the original; Bruce running from the “deadite” and you could see the lights in the rafters of the studio “that does not happen in this film”). The remake pays homage to the original in certain respects and can be spotted throughout the film if you are a true “Evil Dead” fanatic. Unlike the original movie that had been filmed in Tennessee the remake was filmed in its entirety in New Zealand. The recreation of the cabin is almost uncanny with a couple of differences here and there. As expected the special FX are much better with a bigger budget and the advancement of technology. Like the original the actors are not well known and only have done a couple other projects. The cast was well selected and the acting was much better.
If you are a true fan of the original film you may like or dislike it. I myself found it to be entertaining however it doesn’t come close to the original film. If you’ve never seen the original you may like this movie based on its own merits. I must add if you’ve never seen the original film shame on you. To all Evil dead and/or Bruce Campbell fans I can not disclose to you if Bruce makes a cameo but I will say this stay till the end of the credits and you may feel pretty groovy.
Based on Raimi’s original 1981 script, five young adult friends set out on a short vacation in a remote cabin in the woods. Whilst reading from a book that was obviously supposed to stay hidden, one of them ends up summoning dormant demons that end up causing havoc among the group. Killing them off one by one. Though the aura of the film is somewhat similar to the original, we all know that with remakes there are always some differences. In the original the five friends go to a cabin for a care free fun filled weekend the remake centers around one friend trying to kick her drug habits “cold turkey” with the help of her three friends and older brother.
The cinematography of the film is one hundred times better (remember in the original; Bruce running from the “deadite” and you could see the lights in the rafters of the studio “that does not happen in this film”). The remake pays homage to the original in certain respects and can be spotted throughout the film if you are a true “Evil Dead” fanatic. Unlike the original movie that had been filmed in Tennessee the remake was filmed in its entirety in New Zealand. The recreation of the cabin is almost uncanny with a couple of differences here and there. As expected the special FX are much better with a bigger budget and the advancement of technology. Like the original the actors are not well known and only have done a couple other projects. The cast was well selected and the acting was much better.
If you are a true fan of the original film you may like or dislike it. I myself found it to be entertaining however it doesn’t come close to the original film. If you’ve never seen the original you may like this movie based on its own merits. I must add if you’ve never seen the original film shame on you. To all Evil dead and/or Bruce Campbell fans I can not disclose to you if Bruce makes a cameo but I will say this stay till the end of the credits and you may feel pretty groovy.
JT (287 KP) rated The Girl in the Spider's Web (2018) in Movies
Mar 10, 2020
It would be a major change for any actress. But for Claire Foy, to go from the beauty and elegance of Elizabeth II in The Crown, to punked out gothic hacker in The Girl in the Spider’s Web takes some doing – and she adapts to it extremely well.
The film is based on the novel written by David Lagercrantz after original writer Stig Larsson’s death. It attempted to restart the series which had become very popular, especially with the original films starring Noomi Rapace. These were held in high regard and the decision to remake The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo was met with cautious scepticism.
But where David Fincher’s remake was dark and unnerving Fede Alvarez‘s Spider’s Web is stylish and explosive. Filled with gadgets and a variety of hacking abilities that wouldn’t look out of place within the world of James Bond or Mission Impossible, the film doesn’t provide enough sinister thrills. Instead, it pumps out several action set pieces, that while thoroughly entertaining, leave behind the trauma and shock value of Dragon Tattoo and subsequent originals.
Filled with gadgets and a variety of hacking abilities that wouldn’t look out of place within the world of James Bond or Mission Impossible
After an opening that provides plenty of back story surrounding Lisbeth’s childhood, we’re fast-forwarded into the high-tech world. Here a computer programme that can access virtually any nuclear codes in the world has been created by a now remorseful tech whiz (Stephen Merchant) who wants to help destroy it. With a number of people interested in the program, Lisbeth must go on the run and at the same time dig up her past in order to save the world.
This incarnation of Lisbeth Salander feels like a softer version compared with the portrayal by Rapace and 2011’s Rooney Mara. Yet the character is played with gusto by Foy who delivers her lines with a determined grittiness. The film’s plot while somewhat far fetched, is still an enjoyable ride.
The film is based on the novel written by David Lagercrantz after original writer Stig Larsson’s death. It attempted to restart the series which had become very popular, especially with the original films starring Noomi Rapace. These were held in high regard and the decision to remake The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo was met with cautious scepticism.
But where David Fincher’s remake was dark and unnerving Fede Alvarez‘s Spider’s Web is stylish and explosive. Filled with gadgets and a variety of hacking abilities that wouldn’t look out of place within the world of James Bond or Mission Impossible, the film doesn’t provide enough sinister thrills. Instead, it pumps out several action set pieces, that while thoroughly entertaining, leave behind the trauma and shock value of Dragon Tattoo and subsequent originals.
Filled with gadgets and a variety of hacking abilities that wouldn’t look out of place within the world of James Bond or Mission Impossible
After an opening that provides plenty of back story surrounding Lisbeth’s childhood, we’re fast-forwarded into the high-tech world. Here a computer programme that can access virtually any nuclear codes in the world has been created by a now remorseful tech whiz (Stephen Merchant) who wants to help destroy it. With a number of people interested in the program, Lisbeth must go on the run and at the same time dig up her past in order to save the world.
This incarnation of Lisbeth Salander feels like a softer version compared with the portrayal by Rapace and 2011’s Rooney Mara. Yet the character is played with gusto by Foy who delivers her lines with a determined grittiness. The film’s plot while somewhat far fetched, is still an enjoyable ride.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Straw Dogs (2011) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
Successful actress Amy Sumner (Kate Bosworth) is returning from her big city life to her southern hometown of Blackwater. Along with Amy is her well-educated and wealthy husband, David Sumner (James Marsdon). David quickly finds this vacation is filled with tension, particularly when it comes to Amy’s ex-boyfriend, Charlie (Alexander Skarsgård), who is not ready to be out of her life. So it is up to the weakling Harvard hero to protect his relationship, home, and way of life in a town he doesn’t quite understand.
A remake of the 1971 thriller classic of the same name, “Straw Dogs” has lost a lot of its appeal and logic with time. It still has gory moments and the plot is very similar to the original but many of the base thrills have been lost in the move to a present day setting.
This film asks the viewers to suspend disbelief, ignore a number of unfinished back-stories, and stand behind characters who are not engaging or believable. Details, both big and small miss the mark. James Marsdon is incorrectly suited as the shy bumbling academic. The house is a seeming fortress for no apparent reason. The side stories, interesting detractions from the overly built tension between the two leading males, are left unresolved.
Additionally, the themes are awkward and incomplete. There are literary throwbacks and some blatant social commentary but all of the film’s depth is lost on an audience who has no reason to care. Viewers will be preoccupied wondering what the point of the film is.
Sure, the story is engrossing and it does force self-analysis, but the modern adaptation would have benefitted from serious editorial cuts. Had the film been completed in a quarter of the time it might have actually managed to be thrilling!
Unbalanced, vapid, and pointless as a thriller “Straw Dogs” falls prey to the unnecessary remake trap. For a real psychological thrill it would be better to opt for the original.
A remake of the 1971 thriller classic of the same name, “Straw Dogs” has lost a lot of its appeal and logic with time. It still has gory moments and the plot is very similar to the original but many of the base thrills have been lost in the move to a present day setting.
This film asks the viewers to suspend disbelief, ignore a number of unfinished back-stories, and stand behind characters who are not engaging or believable. Details, both big and small miss the mark. James Marsdon is incorrectly suited as the shy bumbling academic. The house is a seeming fortress for no apparent reason. The side stories, interesting detractions from the overly built tension between the two leading males, are left unresolved.
Additionally, the themes are awkward and incomplete. There are literary throwbacks and some blatant social commentary but all of the film’s depth is lost on an audience who has no reason to care. Viewers will be preoccupied wondering what the point of the film is.
Sure, the story is engrossing and it does force self-analysis, but the modern adaptation would have benefitted from serious editorial cuts. Had the film been completed in a quarter of the time it might have actually managed to be thrilling!
Unbalanced, vapid, and pointless as a thriller “Straw Dogs” falls prey to the unnecessary remake trap. For a real psychological thrill it would be better to opt for the original.
KyleQ (267 KP) rated Halloween (2007) in Movies
Jul 20, 2020
Intense and excessive
Before watching this I had become a fan of both House of 1,000 Corpses and The Devil's Rejects, so I did appreciate Rob Zombie as a filmmaker. But it still seemed like a strange idea to have him direct the remake of Halloween.
This remake is 2 hours long, it's mostly stretched to that length due to the scenes involving 10-year-old Michael.
Daeg Faerch plays the young Mikey, and does well, he's creepy and disturbing. Rob's wife Sheri Moon Zombie of course has a role, here as Mikey's mom, she's fine here as the role fits her well. The problem is everyone else, William Forsythe plays Mike's stepdad who happens to be a disgusting excuse for a human being, as is the bully played by Daryl Sabara. The movie then shifts to events at the asylum. Malcolm Mcdowell plays Dr. Sam Loomis. Mcdowell is a good actor, and he gives a pretty good performance here. But he still pales in comparison to the great Donald Pleasence. The movie than movies to 15-years later.
Scout Taylor Compton plays Laurie Strode, she does good, but I was disappointed that she was introduced making a sex joke. Rob couldn't even let the nerdy final girl be sweet and innocent. Needless to say, others are worse.
The movie has LOTS of profanity which honestly drags down any attempts at actually making characters likable. The sex and nudity have also been ramped up.
The violence is definitely brutal, but that's Zombie's style, I felt that Michael was quite terrifying here. Tyler Mane plays Michael, and his 7-foot tall stature is so intimidating.
Overall, Rob Zombie does a good job at developing the story of Michael Myers, and at making some really intense and brutal death scenes. But he does so at the expense of having likable characters and good dialog. I still like it, but I can understand why others wouldn't.
This remake is 2 hours long, it's mostly stretched to that length due to the scenes involving 10-year-old Michael.
Daeg Faerch plays the young Mikey, and does well, he's creepy and disturbing. Rob's wife Sheri Moon Zombie of course has a role, here as Mikey's mom, she's fine here as the role fits her well. The problem is everyone else, William Forsythe plays Mike's stepdad who happens to be a disgusting excuse for a human being, as is the bully played by Daryl Sabara. The movie then shifts to events at the asylum. Malcolm Mcdowell plays Dr. Sam Loomis. Mcdowell is a good actor, and he gives a pretty good performance here. But he still pales in comparison to the great Donald Pleasence. The movie than movies to 15-years later.
Scout Taylor Compton plays Laurie Strode, she does good, but I was disappointed that she was introduced making a sex joke. Rob couldn't even let the nerdy final girl be sweet and innocent. Needless to say, others are worse.
The movie has LOTS of profanity which honestly drags down any attempts at actually making characters likable. The sex and nudity have also been ramped up.
The violence is definitely brutal, but that's Zombie's style, I felt that Michael was quite terrifying here. Tyler Mane plays Michael, and his 7-foot tall stature is so intimidating.
Overall, Rob Zombie does a good job at developing the story of Michael Myers, and at making some really intense and brutal death scenes. But he does so at the expense of having likable characters and good dialog. I still like it, but I can understand why others wouldn't.
LeftSideCut (3776 KP) rated Scream 4 (2011) in Movies
Nov 12, 2020
11 years after Scream 3 "graced" cinema screens, Wes Craven returned to his meta horror series in an era where the genre had gone into full remake mode.
I'm not convinced that Scream 4 needs to exist, especially after the underwhelming way the third film closed out the original trilogy, but this entry is definitely a step up.
The Meta side of things is again a little over the top, but it's good to see Ghostface in a more modern setting. This Ghostface is brutal as well, and Scream 4 is arguably the goriest of the franchise, making it's iconic masked antagonist more intimidating than ever.
The returning cast are back again - Neve Campbell, Courtney Cox, and David Arquette - and have somehow survived all of the Scream movies - as per usual, it feels like a homecoming with them in tow. It's not often in horror you have one person make it this far, let alone three. It gives the series a uniqueness that I can appreciate.
The new characters are all written like typical cannon fodder slasher victims but they all serve there purpose well. Hayden Panittiere is a welcome addition, and it's nice to see Anthony Anderson in a pre Black-ish role.
The plot is so so. It's all ground that has been relentlessly trodden by this point, but it still works. Sidney is back in town. People start getting stabbed. Everyone is a suspect. Rinse and repeat.
The killer reveal in this one isn't too shoddy either, and makes more sense that the reveals in Scream 2 and 3, and there's a lot of direct homage to the first movie in how it's all executed (coming round full circle to the remake commentary)
All in all, Scream 4 is a bucket load of fun, even if it doesn't quite hit the heights if the original. It will be interesting to see how the upcoming sequel will turn out following Craven's death, but I have the feeling it won't quite be the same. Long live Wes Craven!
I'm not convinced that Scream 4 needs to exist, especially after the underwhelming way the third film closed out the original trilogy, but this entry is definitely a step up.
The Meta side of things is again a little over the top, but it's good to see Ghostface in a more modern setting. This Ghostface is brutal as well, and Scream 4 is arguably the goriest of the franchise, making it's iconic masked antagonist more intimidating than ever.
The returning cast are back again - Neve Campbell, Courtney Cox, and David Arquette - and have somehow survived all of the Scream movies - as per usual, it feels like a homecoming with them in tow. It's not often in horror you have one person make it this far, let alone three. It gives the series a uniqueness that I can appreciate.
The new characters are all written like typical cannon fodder slasher victims but they all serve there purpose well. Hayden Panittiere is a welcome addition, and it's nice to see Anthony Anderson in a pre Black-ish role.
The plot is so so. It's all ground that has been relentlessly trodden by this point, but it still works. Sidney is back in town. People start getting stabbed. Everyone is a suspect. Rinse and repeat.
The killer reveal in this one isn't too shoddy either, and makes more sense that the reveals in Scream 2 and 3, and there's a lot of direct homage to the first movie in how it's all executed (coming round full circle to the remake commentary)
All in all, Scream 4 is a bucket load of fun, even if it doesn't quite hit the heights if the original. It will be interesting to see how the upcoming sequel will turn out following Craven's death, but I have the feeling it won't quite be the same. Long live Wes Craven!
Sarah (7800 KP) rated Ghostbusters (2016) in Movies
Aug 13, 2017
Effects (3 more)
Chris Hemsworth
Cameos
Plot
Melissa McCarthy & Kristen Wiig (1 more)
Character stereotypes
Better than expected
I'm really not a fan of Melissa McCarthy and Kristen Wiig, and I was completely against any sort of remake or sequel to the fantastic original, but with this I was pleasantly surprised.
I still didn't like McCarthy and Wiig although I'll admit they weren't as grating as usual. The character of Patty was so stereotypical too which just became very irritating. A lot of the humour too wasn't really my cup of tea but I can't say I'm surprised.
That said, I loved Chris Hemsworth's character and Holtzmann too, and they raised some of the few laughs I got from this film. The effects were brilliant and the plot itself was fairly well thought out. And I loved the cameos from the old Ghostbusters. Not great or a patch on the original, but nowhere near as bad as I'd anticipated.
I still didn't like McCarthy and Wiig although I'll admit they weren't as grating as usual. The character of Patty was so stereotypical too which just became very irritating. A lot of the humour too wasn't really my cup of tea but I can't say I'm surprised.
That said, I loved Chris Hemsworth's character and Holtzmann too, and they raised some of the few laughs I got from this film. The effects were brilliant and the plot itself was fairly well thought out. And I loved the cameos from the old Ghostbusters. Not great or a patch on the original, but nowhere near as bad as I'd anticipated.
I didn't want it to end
I love Horror so I was really excited for this to come out. I didn'y really know what to expect as I haven't watched the original 'IT' yet, or read the book by Stephen King, but I knew the basics of what this movie was about.
I loved the way this film makes you feel and the style of it, it's not like all other horror movies out there. There is a bit of a Stranger Things vibe to it, which I loved.
I absolutely adored Pennywise in this remake, I loved the way he moved his body, it added to the creepyness of the film.
I found it more creepy and a bit disturbing than I did scary, there was one jump scare that got me though.
I loved the way this film makes you feel and the style of it, it's not like all other horror movies out there. There is a bit of a Stranger Things vibe to it, which I loved.
I absolutely adored Pennywise in this remake, I loved the way he moved his body, it added to the creepyness of the film.
I found it more creepy and a bit disturbing than I did scary, there was one jump scare that got me though.