Search
Gareth von Kallenbach (965 KP) rated Far Cry (2008) in Movies
Aug 14, 2019
On a remote island in the Pacific Northwest, a scientist named Dr. Krieger (Udo Kier) is conducting horrific genetic experiments in his secret facility.
Krieger is attempting to create the ultimate soldier for his financial backers and is not above using his own men as test subjects and fodder for his experiments as the morally lacking Krieger only cares about his work and his funding.
In the film “Far Cry”, Director Uwe Boll has taken the classic 3D shooter from Ubisoft and given it his own unique interpretation.
The film stars Til Schweiger as Jack Carver, a former special forces operative who spends his days as a boat captain chartering tourists on whale watching expeditions when he is not enjoying a beer and sleeping the day away.
Jack is hired by a determined investigative reporter named Valerie Cardinal (Emmanuelle Vaugier), to take her to the island so she can get further proof for her story about the bizarre experiments taking place on the island. Valerie has a personal interest in the story as her uncle Max (Ralf Moeller), is one of those stationed at the island facility.
While Jack is reluctant to go near the island he does agree to anchor of the coast and pick up Valerie in a few hours. Of course things do not go as planned as Valerie is captured and Jack’s boat is destroyed leaving him believed to be dead by the Doctor and his forces.
Jack is not one to let this go, and rescues Valerie and looks to find a way off the island while avoiding the ever present troops. The stubborn Valerie is unwilling to leave until she has the information she needs for her story and ignores the dangers.
As if the Doctor and his soldiers were not trouble enough, the super soldiers have escaped and have caused various factions within the Dr’s forces to turn against one another which results in a pitched battle between the factions and the super soldiers.
What follows is a lot of action that is hampered by a weak plot and bad dialogue, and sadly very disappointing monsters.
The leads in the film have very little chemistry with one another and the characters are wafer thin, even by action movie standards. There are attempts at romance and playful banter that fizzle badly leaving only the action sequences to carry the film. Sadly while they are decent enough, especially a good car chase, they cannot overcome the plot issues and the creatures that do not live up to the hype.
Boll has taken a step back here as his recent films have shown progress especially the solid
“Seed” and “1968 Tunnel Rats”. When I visited the set I learned that the production was not allowed to use large aspects of the game and that aside from names, title, and settings, they had to create a new story that was inspired by the game. While the effort is there, the results come up lacking and do not do justice to the game, premise, or talent assembled.
Krieger is attempting to create the ultimate soldier for his financial backers and is not above using his own men as test subjects and fodder for his experiments as the morally lacking Krieger only cares about his work and his funding.
In the film “Far Cry”, Director Uwe Boll has taken the classic 3D shooter from Ubisoft and given it his own unique interpretation.
The film stars Til Schweiger as Jack Carver, a former special forces operative who spends his days as a boat captain chartering tourists on whale watching expeditions when he is not enjoying a beer and sleeping the day away.
Jack is hired by a determined investigative reporter named Valerie Cardinal (Emmanuelle Vaugier), to take her to the island so she can get further proof for her story about the bizarre experiments taking place on the island. Valerie has a personal interest in the story as her uncle Max (Ralf Moeller), is one of those stationed at the island facility.
While Jack is reluctant to go near the island he does agree to anchor of the coast and pick up Valerie in a few hours. Of course things do not go as planned as Valerie is captured and Jack’s boat is destroyed leaving him believed to be dead by the Doctor and his forces.
Jack is not one to let this go, and rescues Valerie and looks to find a way off the island while avoiding the ever present troops. The stubborn Valerie is unwilling to leave until she has the information she needs for her story and ignores the dangers.
As if the Doctor and his soldiers were not trouble enough, the super soldiers have escaped and have caused various factions within the Dr’s forces to turn against one another which results in a pitched battle between the factions and the super soldiers.
What follows is a lot of action that is hampered by a weak plot and bad dialogue, and sadly very disappointing monsters.
The leads in the film have very little chemistry with one another and the characters are wafer thin, even by action movie standards. There are attempts at romance and playful banter that fizzle badly leaving only the action sequences to carry the film. Sadly while they are decent enough, especially a good car chase, they cannot overcome the plot issues and the creatures that do not live up to the hype.
Boll has taken a step back here as his recent films have shown progress especially the solid
“Seed” and “1968 Tunnel Rats”. When I visited the set I learned that the production was not allowed to use large aspects of the game and that aside from names, title, and settings, they had to create a new story that was inspired by the game. While the effort is there, the results come up lacking and do not do justice to the game, premise, or talent assembled.
Gareth von Kallenbach (965 KP) rated Assassin's Creed (2016) in Movies
Jun 19, 2019
Making movies based on video games has had a dubious history when it comes to cinematic success. While “Resident Evil” and “Warcraft” found decent success, films such as “DOOM”, “Super Mario Bros”, “Wing Commander”, and others crashed and burned hard at the box office. The reason for this was explained to me once by Director Uwe Boll who has crafted numerous titles based on video games and has suffered harsh feedback from fans and critics as a result.
Boll explained to me that many times you are only getting the name from a game and some of the characters but there is often a long list of things you cannot do from the game developers which often includes visuals, stories, and content that was used in the games as well as areas that might be used for potential sequels down the road.
So with such restrictive rules, one would ask yourself why anyone would want to take the risk. The answer like all things in Hollywood is money as game based movies already have a built in audience, and all one needs to do is successfully tap into that audience successfully and you can have a successful film and perhaps a series.
With this in mind, developer Ubisoft is looking to bring many of their games to the screen and unlike most game companies, they are taking a very hands-on approach to the process as they were active though all parts of the process from casting to the choice of Director and writers.
Their first effort is “Assassin’s Creed”, which is based on their very popular and successful series of games which combine historical settings with plenty of action and intriguing plots.
The film stars Michael Fassbender as Cal Lynch, who is about to be executed for murdering a criminal. Cal awakens to find that he has been given a new lease on life thanks to Sofia (Marion Cotillard) and her father Rikkin (Jeremy Irons), who run an institute dedicated to the elimination of violence.
Of course there is more to the story than Cal is told and he is strapped into a machine that allows him to experience the memories of one of his ancestors in Spain who was a skilled assassin. Cal ventures back in time again and again, as he attempts to locate a mysterious object that was last known to be in the possession of his ancestor, unaware that there is a much larger game underway with the fate of humanity in the balance.
The film makes a good effort as there are some nice visuals and action sequences, but unfortunately they are too few and far between and the film suffers from a stale narrative and dull characters which is surprising considering the talent that is attached to it.
This is not to say that it is a bad film, but rather it is not very memorable and is something that once seen is likely easy to forget and does not inspire enthusiasm for more which puts a crimp in the plans for the sequels. Time will tell how the film does, but it looks sadly like yet another effort that comes up lacking.
http://sknr.net/2016/12/20/assassins-creed/
Boll explained to me that many times you are only getting the name from a game and some of the characters but there is often a long list of things you cannot do from the game developers which often includes visuals, stories, and content that was used in the games as well as areas that might be used for potential sequels down the road.
So with such restrictive rules, one would ask yourself why anyone would want to take the risk. The answer like all things in Hollywood is money as game based movies already have a built in audience, and all one needs to do is successfully tap into that audience successfully and you can have a successful film and perhaps a series.
With this in mind, developer Ubisoft is looking to bring many of their games to the screen and unlike most game companies, they are taking a very hands-on approach to the process as they were active though all parts of the process from casting to the choice of Director and writers.
Their first effort is “Assassin’s Creed”, which is based on their very popular and successful series of games which combine historical settings with plenty of action and intriguing plots.
The film stars Michael Fassbender as Cal Lynch, who is about to be executed for murdering a criminal. Cal awakens to find that he has been given a new lease on life thanks to Sofia (Marion Cotillard) and her father Rikkin (Jeremy Irons), who run an institute dedicated to the elimination of violence.
Of course there is more to the story than Cal is told and he is strapped into a machine that allows him to experience the memories of one of his ancestors in Spain who was a skilled assassin. Cal ventures back in time again and again, as he attempts to locate a mysterious object that was last known to be in the possession of his ancestor, unaware that there is a much larger game underway with the fate of humanity in the balance.
The film makes a good effort as there are some nice visuals and action sequences, but unfortunately they are too few and far between and the film suffers from a stale narrative and dull characters which is surprising considering the talent that is attached to it.
This is not to say that it is a bad film, but rather it is not very memorable and is something that once seen is likely easy to forget and does not inspire enthusiasm for more which puts a crimp in the plans for the sequels. Time will tell how the film does, but it looks sadly like yet another effort that comes up lacking.
http://sknr.net/2016/12/20/assassins-creed/
Darren (1599 KP) rated Alone in the Dark (2005) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019
Story: I am going to first look at this only as a story, no opinions on the CGI or casting choices. If you were to look at the story as a solo idea you get a solid action horror. Now I hear people going ‘no its just crap’ so let’s look at the details. First off we have an idea of scientific experiment on children to create sleepers, but something goes wrong so we don’t see why it happened until more discoveries in the future. Then we have a search for hidden treasures of a lost ancient people. Add in a paranormal investigator, a secret government paranormal investigating team and the search for a truth. Now looking at those factors we should have a good story not special but enjoyable. Now with terrible casting decisions, awful CGI and a script that could have been written but a child everything goes south fast. As an idea for a story this is good, but as an execution of a story it’s bad. (5/10)
Actor Review
Christian Slater: Edward Carnby a paranormal investigator who has been trying to uncover the truth about his childhood, this puts him in danger as this time he has got closer than ever before. He must team up with his old organisation to final uncover the truth that has lost him the memories of his childhood. Slater strolls for this role without showing any of the skills that made him a star in the early 90s. (5/10)
slater
Tara Reid: Aline Cedrac assistant curator at the museum who also happens to be Edward’s girlfriend, she gets caught up in the middle of the battle after she uncover the location of the door. Going to take a deep breath before going for this one, just no how did this happen? Try your luck in romantic comedies. (2/10)
reid
Stephen Dorff: Commander Burke leader of a military team trying to keep the monsters away from the public, old partner of Edward but after seeing the truth he teams up with them to uncover the truth. Stephen can act and has proven it many times, just need to give him something to work with. (4/10)
dorff
Frank C Turner: Sam an old connection within the organisation that still communicates with Edward, he fills in the science gaps and you can guess what happens to him by the end. Basic supporting performance. (4/10)
fisher
Matthew Walker: Professor Hudgens scientist trying to open the door to the truth about the ancient people, he will do anything to get his answers including sacrificing anybody who gets in his way. As villains go this is generic one that doesn’t need too much to make them special. (4/10)
profes
Director Review: Uwe Boll – He not only managed to mess up a relatively easy story with awful CGI and lack of directing ideas. (2/10)
Action: Plenty of guns being fired, not sure if they ever hit anything as everything is in the pitch black. (3/10)
Horror: Doesn’t give you any scares, frights, well made with the acting. (1/10)
Settings: The settings used for the gun fights are used well, because they would make real settings for such a discover if someone wanted to keep it quiet. (6/10)
Special Effects: Terrible special effects that I only saw one good one and that was a soldier’s head split in two. (1/10)
Suggestion: I think if you are bored one night and this is on it would be acceptable to watch it as it slips close to the line of so bad you have to see. (Late Night TV)
Best Part: The idea
Worst Part: The CGI, Acting and Execution of the idea.
Believability: No (0/10)
Chances of Tears: No (0/10)
Chances of Sequel: Actually has one sequel
Post Credits Scene: No
Oscar Chances: No
Box Office: $10 Million
Budget: $20 Million
Runtime: 1 Hour 39 Minutes
Tagline: Can mankind defeat the army of darkness unleashed by an ancient evil cult?
Overall: Not only did this film destroy the source material, it ruined any chance the video game had of returning.
https://moviesreview101.com/2014/11/09/alone-in-the-dark-2005/
Actor Review
Christian Slater: Edward Carnby a paranormal investigator who has been trying to uncover the truth about his childhood, this puts him in danger as this time he has got closer than ever before. He must team up with his old organisation to final uncover the truth that has lost him the memories of his childhood. Slater strolls for this role without showing any of the skills that made him a star in the early 90s. (5/10)
slater
Tara Reid: Aline Cedrac assistant curator at the museum who also happens to be Edward’s girlfriend, she gets caught up in the middle of the battle after she uncover the location of the door. Going to take a deep breath before going for this one, just no how did this happen? Try your luck in romantic comedies. (2/10)
reid
Stephen Dorff: Commander Burke leader of a military team trying to keep the monsters away from the public, old partner of Edward but after seeing the truth he teams up with them to uncover the truth. Stephen can act and has proven it many times, just need to give him something to work with. (4/10)
dorff
Frank C Turner: Sam an old connection within the organisation that still communicates with Edward, he fills in the science gaps and you can guess what happens to him by the end. Basic supporting performance. (4/10)
fisher
Matthew Walker: Professor Hudgens scientist trying to open the door to the truth about the ancient people, he will do anything to get his answers including sacrificing anybody who gets in his way. As villains go this is generic one that doesn’t need too much to make them special. (4/10)
profes
Director Review: Uwe Boll – He not only managed to mess up a relatively easy story with awful CGI and lack of directing ideas. (2/10)
Action: Plenty of guns being fired, not sure if they ever hit anything as everything is in the pitch black. (3/10)
Horror: Doesn’t give you any scares, frights, well made with the acting. (1/10)
Settings: The settings used for the gun fights are used well, because they would make real settings for such a discover if someone wanted to keep it quiet. (6/10)
Special Effects: Terrible special effects that I only saw one good one and that was a soldier’s head split in two. (1/10)
Suggestion: I think if you are bored one night and this is on it would be acceptable to watch it as it slips close to the line of so bad you have to see. (Late Night TV)
Best Part: The idea
Worst Part: The CGI, Acting and Execution of the idea.
Believability: No (0/10)
Chances of Tears: No (0/10)
Chances of Sequel: Actually has one sequel
Post Credits Scene: No
Oscar Chances: No
Box Office: $10 Million
Budget: $20 Million
Runtime: 1 Hour 39 Minutes
Tagline: Can mankind defeat the army of darkness unleashed by an ancient evil cult?
Overall: Not only did this film destroy the source material, it ruined any chance the video game had of returning.
https://moviesreview101.com/2014/11/09/alone-in-the-dark-2005/