Search
Search results
JT (287 KP) rated Silent House (2011) in Movies
Mar 10, 2020
The tag line for The Silent House is “real fear in real time” the main premise being that the film is shot in one continuous take. You can believe it or not and debate how hard it would be to pull off?
Laura (Florencia Colucci) and her father Wilson (Gustavo Alonso) head to an old house with the intention of spending a few days clearing it out as the owner is looking to put it up for sale. Arriving late they settle in for the night, but it’s not long before all hell breaks loose.
With a noise coming from upstairs Wilson goes to investigate but when he comes back down a little worse for wear Laura has to embrace the darkness and avoid the terror within. It’s an exceptional piece of film making which will leave you breathless. There are a few little twists and turns and a great sequence involving a polaroid camera.
Of course Hollywood has capitalized on this success and churned out a pointless remake as they do with most other foreign films. But it’s not as good as this original horror gem.
Laura (Florencia Colucci) and her father Wilson (Gustavo Alonso) head to an old house with the intention of spending a few days clearing it out as the owner is looking to put it up for sale. Arriving late they settle in for the night, but it’s not long before all hell breaks loose.
With a noise coming from upstairs Wilson goes to investigate but when he comes back down a little worse for wear Laura has to embrace the darkness and avoid the terror within. It’s an exceptional piece of film making which will leave you breathless. There are a few little twists and turns and a great sequence involving a polaroid camera.
Of course Hollywood has capitalized on this success and churned out a pointless remake as they do with most other foreign films. But it’s not as good as this original horror gem.
Barry Newman (204 KP) rated A Nightmare on Elm Street (1984) in Movies
Feb 1, 2020
The original and by far the best of the Nightmare series. Wes Craven’s film is like most 80’s movies looking a little dated in 2019 particularly in its special effects but to me still holds up very well as an original and unsettling horror thriller that puts a unique supernatural spin on the well established slasher formula. The film’s ace is in it’s boogeyman Freddy Krueger, coming after the silent killers of ‘Halloween’ and ‘Friday the 13th’ Robert Englund’s iconic Freddy actually had a personality and the sequels realising his popularity put him front and centre with much more screen time and subsequently making him considerably less scary . Craven conjures up some memorable kill scenes here and the concept of being vulnerable somewhere seemingly as safe as in your dreams makes for a great horror movie.
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated The Wolves of Savin Hill (2014) in Movies
Aug 16, 2019
The indie movie, The Wolves of Savin Hill is a very fine directorial debut for John Beaton Hill. He also wrote this story where sentimentalities and brutality clash between two best friends who have lost touch over the years. In their youth, they made a promise youth that now haunts them as they are adults. In what results is a trial of what’s left of their friendship. In how this film treats the subject matter is like that of silent lucidity.
In what they have become, Tom (David Cooley) stayed in Boston only to grow up to be an alcoholic troublemaker and Sean (Brian Scannell) relocated to Los Angeles with Tom’s sister Emily to eventually work the beat as a cop with an axe to grind. Anyone who tries to mess with him often got the end of the stick. But when Emily is found dead and news reaches home, Tom goes to LA to confront Sean. The web of deceit he finds himself in is more than he can handle.
Cooley and Scannel deliver strong performances. The plot only gets stranger at every succeeding moment, and the draw this film creates gets viewers invested into wanting to understand the psyche of each of these leading men. Hill crafted a nicely enticing film that wraps two time periods together to reveal the darkest nature of what friends are willing to do for each other. The flashbacks are far more interesting than the now.
To reveal anymore information will only spoil the causality of how these two have to contend with each other. When this film hits more festivals, viewers can discover for themselves in what human nature means according to this filmmaker. The hills have eyes and what he sees may not be necessarily good.
In what they have become, Tom (David Cooley) stayed in Boston only to grow up to be an alcoholic troublemaker and Sean (Brian Scannell) relocated to Los Angeles with Tom’s sister Emily to eventually work the beat as a cop with an axe to grind. Anyone who tries to mess with him often got the end of the stick. But when Emily is found dead and news reaches home, Tom goes to LA to confront Sean. The web of deceit he finds himself in is more than he can handle.
Cooley and Scannel deliver strong performances. The plot only gets stranger at every succeeding moment, and the draw this film creates gets viewers invested into wanting to understand the psyche of each of these leading men. Hill crafted a nicely enticing film that wraps two time periods together to reveal the darkest nature of what friends are willing to do for each other. The flashbacks are far more interesting than the now.
To reveal anymore information will only spoil the causality of how these two have to contend with each other. When this film hits more festivals, viewers can discover for themselves in what human nature means according to this filmmaker. The hills have eyes and what he sees may not be necessarily good.
A film with dodgy voices.
Catching up here with a review of a film I saw a couple of weeks ago.
What a great film “Get Out” was. Jordan Peele’s classic which unpeeled (sic) race relations in a wholly novel and horrifying way. Yes, the story was a bit ‘out there’ and unbelievable, but he pulled it off with great chutzpah.
With his follow-up film – “Us”…. sorry but, for me, it just didn’t work.
From great beginnings
It all starts so promisingly. Young Adelaide Wilson (a fine debut performance by Madison Curry) is on a seaside holiday with her mother and careless father when she wanders onto the deserted Santa Cruz beach at night. There sits, like some gothic horror ghost train, the Hall of Mirrors. “Find Yourself” it taunts. She makes the mistake of entering and changes her life forever.
Spin forwards 30 years and Adelaide, now a married mother of two, is back in Santa Cruz with a terrifying feeling that things are about to go pear-shaped. And of course they do!
Why oh why oh why those voices?
This film had me gripped until a particular point. Having people stand still and silent at the end of your drive is an incredibly spooky thing to show. But then, for me, the wheels came off big time. The “reveal” of who these people were I could take. But the manner of their behaviour and – particularly – how they talked was horrifying; and not in a good way. When “Red” started speaking I couldn’t believe my ears: Joe Pasquale after swallowing Donald Duck.
From there, the film became farcical for me, descending in progressive stages to a tunnel-based apocalypse: a plot element that was just so paper thin it bore no scrutiny at all.
This was, no doubt, an attempt at a satirical dig at the class structure of America (“We are Americans” adding a double meaning to the name of the film). If it had been played as a deliberate comedy farce it might have worked. But otherwise no.
Flashes of Peele brilliance
This is not to say that there are not positives in the film. The excellent Lupita Nyong’o gives the whacky material her all, and the other adult female lead – Elisabeth Moss (from TV’s “The Handmaid’s Tale”) – is good value as Kitty Tyler: a diabolical incarnation in either form!
Peele also delivers flashes of directorial brilliance. The “hands across America”, disappearing into the sea, is a sight that stays with you. I also liked the twist at the end, although in retrospect it’s difficult to relate it to the rest of the story and strikes of desperation in the storytelling.
Overall, a big disappointment
I know there are some who really like this movie. Each to their own, but I was not one of them. After “Get Out” I was hoping for something much better. I hope that was just Jordan Peele’s “difficult second album”.
What a great film “Get Out” was. Jordan Peele’s classic which unpeeled (sic) race relations in a wholly novel and horrifying way. Yes, the story was a bit ‘out there’ and unbelievable, but he pulled it off with great chutzpah.
With his follow-up film – “Us”…. sorry but, for me, it just didn’t work.
From great beginnings
It all starts so promisingly. Young Adelaide Wilson (a fine debut performance by Madison Curry) is on a seaside holiday with her mother and careless father when she wanders onto the deserted Santa Cruz beach at night. There sits, like some gothic horror ghost train, the Hall of Mirrors. “Find Yourself” it taunts. She makes the mistake of entering and changes her life forever.
Spin forwards 30 years and Adelaide, now a married mother of two, is back in Santa Cruz with a terrifying feeling that things are about to go pear-shaped. And of course they do!
Why oh why oh why those voices?
This film had me gripped until a particular point. Having people stand still and silent at the end of your drive is an incredibly spooky thing to show. But then, for me, the wheels came off big time. The “reveal” of who these people were I could take. But the manner of their behaviour and – particularly – how they talked was horrifying; and not in a good way. When “Red” started speaking I couldn’t believe my ears: Joe Pasquale after swallowing Donald Duck.
From there, the film became farcical for me, descending in progressive stages to a tunnel-based apocalypse: a plot element that was just so paper thin it bore no scrutiny at all.
This was, no doubt, an attempt at a satirical dig at the class structure of America (“We are Americans” adding a double meaning to the name of the film). If it had been played as a deliberate comedy farce it might have worked. But otherwise no.
Flashes of Peele brilliance
This is not to say that there are not positives in the film. The excellent Lupita Nyong’o gives the whacky material her all, and the other adult female lead – Elisabeth Moss (from TV’s “The Handmaid’s Tale”) – is good value as Kitty Tyler: a diabolical incarnation in either form!
Peele also delivers flashes of directorial brilliance. The “hands across America”, disappearing into the sea, is a sight that stays with you. I also liked the twist at the end, although in retrospect it’s difficult to relate it to the rest of the story and strikes of desperation in the storytelling.
Overall, a big disappointment
I know there are some who really like this movie. Each to their own, but I was not one of them. After “Get Out” I was hoping for something much better. I hope that was just Jordan Peele’s “difficult second album”.
Charlotte (184 KP) rated Dagger Hill in Books
Sep 10, 2021
Silent hill for teenagers....Creepy and pretty terrifying.
The potential to be made into a film is definitely lurking there.
The four main characters, teenagers on the threshold of their senior year, are interesting and quirky. Each has a different personality that gels well with the others but doesn't then blend into one boring entity.
Set in 1989, a time before the internet and mobile phones (as we know them now and the actual ability to carry one) Dagger Hill has a small town charm. A charm that contrasts against the awful things that happen there.
This is at least a young adult read with themes of horror and violence. It could easily sit on a shelf with books written by such greats as King and Laymon. It's the kind of book that crawls into your thoughts when you least expect it and creates vivid scenes in your mind.
@Merissa
The potential to be made into a film is definitely lurking there.
The four main characters, teenagers on the threshold of their senior year, are interesting and quirky. Each has a different personality that gels well with the others but doesn't then blend into one boring entity.
Set in 1989, a time before the internet and mobile phones (as we know them now and the actual ability to carry one) Dagger Hill has a small town charm. A charm that contrasts against the awful things that happen there.
This is at least a young adult read with themes of horror and violence. It could easily sit on a shelf with books written by such greats as King and Laymon. It's the kind of book that crawls into your thoughts when you least expect it and creates vivid scenes in your mind.
@Merissa
Phillip McSween (751 KP) rated The Kid Brother (1927) in Movies
Jul 25, 2019
Great Conflict, Great Story
When a huge town fund goes missing, Harold (Harold Lloyd) sees a grand opportunity to prove himself to his family while winning the heart of a girl he likes. When the movie first started, I had no idea what to expect as it was my very first silent film. Once I got settled in and used to the concept, I was thoroughly impressed.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 6
If the movie continued on like it started, I would have hated it. For such a short run time, The Kid Brother didn’t exactly come out of the gates swinging. It’s like an old car: Gotta warm up first. Once it gets going…
Characters: 10
So what if all the other characters were one-dimensional? The movie revolves completely around Harold and Harold delivers. You’ve gotta respect the kid as he’s just trying to live up to his family name. His father has never thought much of him and his brothers are always roughing him up and, for once, Harold is hoping to come out on top. Not only does he deal with a number of moral dilemmas, but you can’t help but fall in love with the dude’s craft and cunning. Harold will make you laugh and cheer by the end of it.
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Conflict: 10
This movie has one of the coolest action scenes that I’ve seen in an earlier film. It involves a big fight on an abandoned ship. Between that, a cool chariot-style race, and Harold constantly trying to avoid awkward scrapes there is plenty of conflict to go around.
Entertainment Value: 10
Memorability: 10
Pace: 10
Slow start but quickly picks up steam. It’s a short ride, but the directors made sure they used up every ounce of time available. I appreciated that all the scenes really were necessary and they never overstayed their welcome.
Plot: 10
The story is succinct and very well-written. There weren’t any cheats as each plot point moved seamlessly to the next. Great character-development is weaved in as well. All the ingredients for a great story.
Resolution: 10
Overall: 96
If it weren’t for a weaker beginning, The Kid Brother would rank right up there with the all-time best. It had me looking forward to a deeper dive into the silent film world.
Acting: 10
Beginning: 6
If the movie continued on like it started, I would have hated it. For such a short run time, The Kid Brother didn’t exactly come out of the gates swinging. It’s like an old car: Gotta warm up first. Once it gets going…
Characters: 10
So what if all the other characters were one-dimensional? The movie revolves completely around Harold and Harold delivers. You’ve gotta respect the kid as he’s just trying to live up to his family name. His father has never thought much of him and his brothers are always roughing him up and, for once, Harold is hoping to come out on top. Not only does he deal with a number of moral dilemmas, but you can’t help but fall in love with the dude’s craft and cunning. Harold will make you laugh and cheer by the end of it.
Cinematography/Visuals: 10
Conflict: 10
This movie has one of the coolest action scenes that I’ve seen in an earlier film. It involves a big fight on an abandoned ship. Between that, a cool chariot-style race, and Harold constantly trying to avoid awkward scrapes there is plenty of conflict to go around.
Entertainment Value: 10
Memorability: 10
Pace: 10
Slow start but quickly picks up steam. It’s a short ride, but the directors made sure they used up every ounce of time available. I appreciated that all the scenes really were necessary and they never overstayed their welcome.
Plot: 10
The story is succinct and very well-written. There weren’t any cheats as each plot point moved seamlessly to the next. Great character-development is weaved in as well. All the ingredients for a great story.
Resolution: 10
Overall: 96
If it weren’t for a weaker beginning, The Kid Brother would rank right up there with the all-time best. It had me looking forward to a deeper dive into the silent film world.
LeftSideCut (3778 KP) rated Jay and Silent Bob Reboot (2019) in Movies
Mar 7, 2020
To put it simply, if you're not too keen on anything related to Jay & Silent Bob or Kevin Smith, then this entry is not going to change your mind!
The first film from way back in 2001 was already loveably dumb enough. It's collision of immature humour, social commentary, slapstick silliness and plentiful references to past Kevin Smith projects leant it an awkward charm, and things are no different this time around, with exception of everyone involved looking older.
The plot revolves around the titular duo traveling to Hollywood to stop the reboot of a comic book film featuring characters based on their likenesses (literally the same plot as the first). Cue plenty of remarks about the state of cinema and the unstoppable geyser of reboots/remakes/re-imaginings, followed by an absurd road trip, and everything feels familiar and homely.
Jason Mewes and Kevin Smith are just as likable as they every have been as Jay & SB, and the supporting characters, lead by Smith's daughter Harley Quinn, are much the same (although they took a bit longer to grow on me).
There is a veritable plethora of cameos and Clerks call backs peppered throughout, including the likes of Ben Affleck, Matt Damon, Chris Hemsworth, Joey Lauren Adams, Melissa Benoist, Val Kilmer, Jason Biggs, Robert Kirkman....the list goes on and on. None of these inclusions feel particularly forced, and everyone seems pretty willing to be a part of the silliness.
The script is a mixed bag of decent gags, meta lines (sometimes a bit too over the top, to the point of almost insulting the audience!), Kevin Smith talking a whole bunch of shit about himself and some genuinely touching moments. Seriously - towards the films climax, I genuinely fretted that i might let out a little sob...
The truth is, I grew up watching films like Clerks, Dogma, Mallrats etc, and whenever a new entry is put out, I remember just how much these niche comedies mean to me. Jay & Silent Bob Reboot fits right in there with the rest of them.
It's not perfect by any means, but this is a film that can pull off Chris Jericho playing a KKK leader, Redman and Method Man giving parenting, whilst still including a lip wobbling tribute to the late Stan Lee (a we'll know fan of Kevin Smith and his work). How can anyone not appreciate that!?
The first film from way back in 2001 was already loveably dumb enough. It's collision of immature humour, social commentary, slapstick silliness and plentiful references to past Kevin Smith projects leant it an awkward charm, and things are no different this time around, with exception of everyone involved looking older.
The plot revolves around the titular duo traveling to Hollywood to stop the reboot of a comic book film featuring characters based on their likenesses (literally the same plot as the first). Cue plenty of remarks about the state of cinema and the unstoppable geyser of reboots/remakes/re-imaginings, followed by an absurd road trip, and everything feels familiar and homely.
Jason Mewes and Kevin Smith are just as likable as they every have been as Jay & SB, and the supporting characters, lead by Smith's daughter Harley Quinn, are much the same (although they took a bit longer to grow on me).
There is a veritable plethora of cameos and Clerks call backs peppered throughout, including the likes of Ben Affleck, Matt Damon, Chris Hemsworth, Joey Lauren Adams, Melissa Benoist, Val Kilmer, Jason Biggs, Robert Kirkman....the list goes on and on. None of these inclusions feel particularly forced, and everyone seems pretty willing to be a part of the silliness.
The script is a mixed bag of decent gags, meta lines (sometimes a bit too over the top, to the point of almost insulting the audience!), Kevin Smith talking a whole bunch of shit about himself and some genuinely touching moments. Seriously - towards the films climax, I genuinely fretted that i might let out a little sob...
The truth is, I grew up watching films like Clerks, Dogma, Mallrats etc, and whenever a new entry is put out, I remember just how much these niche comedies mean to me. Jay & Silent Bob Reboot fits right in there with the rest of them.
It's not perfect by any means, but this is a film that can pull off Chris Jericho playing a KKK leader, Redman and Method Man giving parenting, whilst still including a lip wobbling tribute to the late Stan Lee (a we'll know fan of Kevin Smith and his work). How can anyone not appreciate that!?
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated Sicario (2015) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
Those expecting Sicario to be a high action film will be disappointed. Instead what they will find is a slow burn suspenseful drama with fantastic acting and a more realistic take on the drug war than Hollywood traditionally likes to show us.
Emily Blunt delivers another strong acting performance as a “girl scout” FBI agent who raids drug houses in Arizona. She is somewhat of a “Bad Ass” among her crew, as her life has become dedicated to the job and she believes in the cause. So when Josh Brolin comes in as the head of a “spook” CIA taskforce and recruits blunt to make some “noise” and go after the head of Mexican drug cartel, she jumps at the chance to stop the men responsible for the drug houses and make a real difference. The only problem is that as the low man on the taskforce, she is not told much which frustrates her when things start to not appear by the book.
To make things worse, Benicio Del Toro is a suspicious part of Brolin’s taskforce who doesn’t seem to fit into the puzzle. It is through Del Toro that we learn the truth about the operation and the real meaning of the word Sicario. Del Toro’s performance burns with silent chaos as you just know he is the “coolest guy” in the room, both in style and nerves. He is someone who is not to be trifled with as an ally or an enemy but still maintains a sincerity towards Blunt and her idealism. This is one of his best performances in years.
Ultimately Sicario is a slow paced suspenseful action film that feels real. Even though the pacing is slow, at no point did the film drag as you are constantly wondering what is really going on just like the strong and refreshing female lead in an action film like this.
Emily Blunt delivers another strong acting performance as a “girl scout” FBI agent who raids drug houses in Arizona. She is somewhat of a “Bad Ass” among her crew, as her life has become dedicated to the job and she believes in the cause. So when Josh Brolin comes in as the head of a “spook” CIA taskforce and recruits blunt to make some “noise” and go after the head of Mexican drug cartel, she jumps at the chance to stop the men responsible for the drug houses and make a real difference. The only problem is that as the low man on the taskforce, she is not told much which frustrates her when things start to not appear by the book.
To make things worse, Benicio Del Toro is a suspicious part of Brolin’s taskforce who doesn’t seem to fit into the puzzle. It is through Del Toro that we learn the truth about the operation and the real meaning of the word Sicario. Del Toro’s performance burns with silent chaos as you just know he is the “coolest guy” in the room, both in style and nerves. He is someone who is not to be trifled with as an ally or an enemy but still maintains a sincerity towards Blunt and her idealism. This is one of his best performances in years.
Ultimately Sicario is a slow paced suspenseful action film that feels real. Even though the pacing is slow, at no point did the film drag as you are constantly wondering what is really going on just like the strong and refreshing female lead in an action film like this.
Matthew Weiner recommended And Now My Love (1974) in Movies (curated)
Andrew Kennedy (199 KP) rated Cube (1997) in Movies
Jul 8, 2019
The puzzles (1 more)
Original concept
Before Saw and Hostel conjured up the term "torture porn" and it was rammed home with each sequel, a little Canadian film called Cube came out to little fanfare in 1997.
Made for a mere $400,000 dollars and with a lot of the special effects provided by local Canadian companies for free.
It is a simple yet ingenious premise, six strangers awaken in series of cube like rooms no recollection of how they got there or even why they are there. It also seems some of the rooms contain traps.
The tense and almost claustrophobic surroundings force both friendships and mistrust in equal measure.
The characters are well rounded and deliver believable performances of people trapped against their will, for the most part. There is a one point I disliked that felt too preachy but I did like the character.
The other thing I enjoyed was the forced interaction between the main protagonists because while there are traps this isn't some Saw film, the traps are present but just to provide the threat of one false move. I would even argue that at times the traps don't provide much of a threat but the "silent cube" really rings every drop of tension out of that scene.
The most interesting thing I found was that some people criticized the ending. Yes by the end not everything is explained, there is a lot of questions left unanswered and this is a good thing.
Why must we have everything explained? Leave thinking and wondering. Director Vincenzo Natali did film a longer ending and it was the first thing he cut.
Made for a mere $400,000 dollars and with a lot of the special effects provided by local Canadian companies for free.
It is a simple yet ingenious premise, six strangers awaken in series of cube like rooms no recollection of how they got there or even why they are there. It also seems some of the rooms contain traps.
The tense and almost claustrophobic surroundings force both friendships and mistrust in equal measure.
The characters are well rounded and deliver believable performances of people trapped against their will, for the most part. There is a one point I disliked that felt too preachy but I did like the character.
The other thing I enjoyed was the forced interaction between the main protagonists because while there are traps this isn't some Saw film, the traps are present but just to provide the threat of one false move. I would even argue that at times the traps don't provide much of a threat but the "silent cube" really rings every drop of tension out of that scene.
The most interesting thing I found was that some people criticized the ending. Yes by the end not everything is explained, there is a lot of questions left unanswered and this is a good thing.
Why must we have everything explained? Leave thinking and wondering. Director Vincenzo Natali did film a longer ending and it was the first thing he cut.