Search
Search results
Sarah (7798 KP) rated A Nightmare on Elm Street (2010) in Movies
Oct 19, 2018
Completely unnecessary
The original Nightmare on a Elm Street is a classic, so a reboot was always going to be a risky choice. There are parts of this that are actually not too bad, it’s just a shame the rest of the film is a mess.
So story wise, this does have a few nods to the original but yet also expands on the back story behind Freddy, which is definitely a good thing. The amount of gore is still very much present and a lot of the special effects are quite good, although there is a few dodgy patches of CGI. They’ve made Freddy very scary and creepy in this, and gotten rid of the jokes and humour, which really does work. The problem is that Jackie Earle Haley just isn’t Freddy. There was something about him, his look, that really didn’t work for me. And the rest of the casting wasn’t great either - I have no idea what Rooney Mara was doing in this but she was not likeable at all as Nancy. The story faltered too in the second half and dragged on, to the point where it became very boring. And the ending wasn’t a surprise. Yet another unnecessary reboot.
So story wise, this does have a few nods to the original but yet also expands on the back story behind Freddy, which is definitely a good thing. The amount of gore is still very much present and a lot of the special effects are quite good, although there is a few dodgy patches of CGI. They’ve made Freddy very scary and creepy in this, and gotten rid of the jokes and humour, which really does work. The problem is that Jackie Earle Haley just isn’t Freddy. There was something about him, his look, that really didn’t work for me. And the rest of the casting wasn’t great either - I have no idea what Rooney Mara was doing in this but she was not likeable at all as Nancy. The story faltered too in the second half and dragged on, to the point where it became very boring. And the ending wasn’t a surprise. Yet another unnecessary reboot.
Sarah (7798 KP) rated Attack the Block (2011) in Movies
Dec 30, 2018
A silly, fun British horror
When I first saw this at the cinema I absolutely loved it, but I haven’t really seen it since. On watching it again recently, I have to admit it’s not quite as good as I remembered but it’s still a very enjoyable film.
It’s a very B-movie esque horror film, with very low budget, lots of blood and a fairly unknown cast. Of course a lot of the cast have now gone on to bigger things (John Boyega, Jodie Whittaker and Luke Treadaway mainly), but they’re still very good and great to watch in this. The plot is fun and a little bit silly, and the aliens themselves are very well done. They’re creepy and pretty terrifying, without being overly complicated and there’s a lot of good physical effects thrown in here in addition to cgi. The most annoying thing about this film is the language. I completely understand why it has been set on a council estate in London, that’s part of the entertainment, however some of the slang and gang type language grates after a while. It’s difficult to understand and a little bit irritating after a while. Aside from this it’s a very enjoyable low budget horror that’s worth a watch.
It’s a very B-movie esque horror film, with very low budget, lots of blood and a fairly unknown cast. Of course a lot of the cast have now gone on to bigger things (John Boyega, Jodie Whittaker and Luke Treadaway mainly), but they’re still very good and great to watch in this. The plot is fun and a little bit silly, and the aliens themselves are very well done. They’re creepy and pretty terrifying, without being overly complicated and there’s a lot of good physical effects thrown in here in addition to cgi. The most annoying thing about this film is the language. I completely understand why it has been set on a council estate in London, that’s part of the entertainment, however some of the slang and gang type language grates after a while. It’s difficult to understand and a little bit irritating after a while. Aside from this it’s a very enjoyable low budget horror that’s worth a watch.
Jordan Binkerd (567 KP) rated The Mummy Returns (2001) in Movies
Aug 13, 2019
Brendan Fraser (6 more)
Rachel Weiss
John Hannah
Oded Fehr
Arnold Vosloo
Continuity of cast
Not as good as the first one, but still better than the next....
Introduction of concepts and elements that weren't present in the first - reincarnation, Rick's tattoo and it's significance, etc (1 more)
The Scorpion King's introduction looks like a PS2 cutscene.
A solid sequel
This is a solid sequel, even if it falls short of the mark set by it's predecessor. The entire (surviving) cast returns, which I appreciate in a franchise, and the story mostly delivers. There are a few frustrating elements, such as all of a sudden adding concepts such as reincarnation (especially given that the concurring reveal would have been relevant to the story of the first film) or Rick's tattoo that he's had since his childhood, except that he didn't have it in the first movie. Where this film really falls short, though, is a couple bad animation moments. Mostly the film is a lot like the first in terms of effects - decent animation for 2002, if occasionally dated, but a couple of sequences are jarringly bad, especially the Rock's entrance as the Scorpion King. Is it enough to keep me from watching? No. But I still cringe at that point every time.
LeftSideCut (3778 KP) rated Child's Play 3 (1991) in Movies
Oct 22, 2019 (Updated Nov 8, 2019)
The third outing for Chucky unfortunately offers nothing new.
It's simply a less fun re tread of the first two.
The setting for Child's Play 3 mainly takes place at a military academy for young people, with typical character cliches thrown in - the nerdy coward type who will clearly redeem himself by the end of the movie, the harsh drill sergeant, the jock type bullies, the badass female, and of course a whole host of people who (for the third time!) don't believe a now teenage Andy Barcley, that there's a killer doll on the loose.
It's all pretty tiresome, and tied together by a poor script.
Chucky himself is the same old, shooting off sweary one liners and being a general prick to everyone he comes across (not necessarily a bad thing).
The finale is pretty lackluster, and not a patch on the seemingly never ending abuse parade against Chucky from Child's Play 2, but it does boast some nice animatronic work and some nasty practical effects.
Child's Play 3 is ultimately a thoroughly underwhelming sequel, sat in a weird purgatory between the more horror themed elements of the first movie, and the schlockier elements of the later films.
It's simply a less fun re tread of the first two.
The setting for Child's Play 3 mainly takes place at a military academy for young people, with typical character cliches thrown in - the nerdy coward type who will clearly redeem himself by the end of the movie, the harsh drill sergeant, the jock type bullies, the badass female, and of course a whole host of people who (for the third time!) don't believe a now teenage Andy Barcley, that there's a killer doll on the loose.
It's all pretty tiresome, and tied together by a poor script.
Chucky himself is the same old, shooting off sweary one liners and being a general prick to everyone he comes across (not necessarily a bad thing).
The finale is pretty lackluster, and not a patch on the seemingly never ending abuse parade against Chucky from Child's Play 2, but it does boast some nice animatronic work and some nasty practical effects.
Child's Play 3 is ultimately a thoroughly underwhelming sequel, sat in a weird purgatory between the more horror themed elements of the first movie, and the schlockier elements of the later films.
Terry Whitaker (120 KP) rated Star Wars: Episode I – The Phantom Menace (1999) in Movies
Nov 12, 2019
I dont think this was as bad as some people are making out. Problem was always going to be the original Trilogy. It was THAT good! A New Hope, Empire Strikes Back and Return Of the Jedi each had something amazing about it. Each had the 'Jedi' factor. Also had one of the best twists in movie history in Empire Strikes Back!
Phantom Meanace really didnt have any of that. Not at all. It had a great villain in Darth Maul though. Also Ewan Macgregor and Liam Neeson were good in their roles. Yes, the lad was a bit disappointing but that was only cos he was a little...soppy? I shall not mention Jar Ja.....nooooo, I wont say his name!
But, the special effects were pretty amazing, especially on the big screen! The story was ok too. Not too adventurous but plods along ok.
As I said at the beginning, this was always going to be a difficult one if you consider what it follows...or precedes in this case! The hype on this was huge. Gigantically huge. However much it falls short will be magnified because of its hype.
Take the hype away and the film is exciting and fun. But no...not in the same league as the originals.
Phantom Meanace really didnt have any of that. Not at all. It had a great villain in Darth Maul though. Also Ewan Macgregor and Liam Neeson were good in their roles. Yes, the lad was a bit disappointing but that was only cos he was a little...soppy? I shall not mention Jar Ja.....nooooo, I wont say his name!
But, the special effects were pretty amazing, especially on the big screen! The story was ok too. Not too adventurous but plods along ok.
As I said at the beginning, this was always going to be a difficult one if you consider what it follows...or precedes in this case! The hype on this was huge. Gigantically huge. However much it falls short will be magnified because of its hype.
Take the hype away and the film is exciting and fun. But no...not in the same league as the originals.
Sarah (7798 KP) rated Doom (2005) in Movies
Dec 19, 2019
Entertainingly bad
Doom is one of those films that perfectly fits the "so bad it's good" category. It might be pretty ridiculously, but it's entertainingly so.
I vaguely know the game, aka watched my brother play it when we were younger as I was too scared to play it myself, so I can't really compare this to the game. As plots go it isn't a bad one although it's let down by a rather poor script and some questionable special effects at times - which arent helped by the fact that this film is nearly 15 years old! Alhough the horror aspect is quite good and there's a decent amount of gore. It's strange seeing Dwayne Johnson and Karl Urban in this as they both look so young! And it's good to see Johnson's acting skills have improved since this too... the cast overall are very good and decent, and it's a shame they're a little let down by other things in this film.
By far my favourite bit of this film though is when they recreate the game with the first person shooter scene. It's an absolute riot, so much fun and I almost wanted to mark this a little higher just because of this scene.
I vaguely know the game, aka watched my brother play it when we were younger as I was too scared to play it myself, so I can't really compare this to the game. As plots go it isn't a bad one although it's let down by a rather poor script and some questionable special effects at times - which arent helped by the fact that this film is nearly 15 years old! Alhough the horror aspect is quite good and there's a decent amount of gore. It's strange seeing Dwayne Johnson and Karl Urban in this as they both look so young! And it's good to see Johnson's acting skills have improved since this too... the cast overall are very good and decent, and it's a shame they're a little let down by other things in this film.
By far my favourite bit of this film though is when they recreate the game with the first person shooter scene. It's an absolute riot, so much fun and I almost wanted to mark this a little higher just because of this scene.
Barry Newman (204 KP) rated The Irishman (2019) in Movies
Jan 11, 2020
Goodfellas is one of my all time favourite movies so this long awaited reunion of Scorsese, DeNiro and Pesci was a mouthwatering prospect. Whilst not a patch on Goodfellas this was still a very impressive and complex piece of film making. This is some of DeNiro's finest work in years and almost enough to forgive him those bagel adverts. Pacino is brilliant as Jimmy Hoffa and it's simply a joy to have Joe Pesci back on the screen. The deaging effects are very good but not quite 100% perfect, at times the characters have a slightly waxy look about them but you soon get used to them. However I did feel the film was lacking in real standout scenes that would become iconic in years to come like Scorsese's earlier work and was more consistently good than outstandingly brilliant. The 3.5 hour running time was a bit over indulgent as well and could easily have been trimmed a bit. The mammoth running time is also a factor likely to put me off watching it again as often as I would a shorter film. So definitely still much to enjoy and admire here and should definitely be in the running for plenty of awards.
Awix (3310 KP) rated The Uncanny (1977) in Movies
Mar 7, 2020 (Updated Mar 7, 2020)
So-so horror anthology would almost certainly be totally unwatchable without the presence of fine actors like Peter Cushing, Ray Milland and Donald Pleasence doing their damnedest to lift some rather dubious material. The frame story concerns a conspiracy by cats to secretly run the world, but the different segments are all about vengeance-by-cat: various people get their comeuppances at the paws of our whiskered friends.
First story (maid murders her employer over an amended will) is okay but nothing special; second one (orphan with witchy tendencies finds her cat is not welcome in her new home) is let down by iffy special effects and iffier child acting; third (rum goings-on in 30s Hollywood) is the best, being a rather tongue-in-cheek look at the horror film industry (the suspiciously-named company 'Hemorrhage Films' is involved). None of them are honestly what you'd call great, though, and there is perhaps too much reliance on actors standing around while stage-hands throw stuffed cats at them. A bit more graphic and nasty than you tend to find in films from this genre, but only relatively speaking. Passes the time decently enough if low-budget horror portmanteaus from the 70s are your thing.
First story (maid murders her employer over an amended will) is okay but nothing special; second one (orphan with witchy tendencies finds her cat is not welcome in her new home) is let down by iffy special effects and iffier child acting; third (rum goings-on in 30s Hollywood) is the best, being a rather tongue-in-cheek look at the horror film industry (the suspiciously-named company 'Hemorrhage Films' is involved). None of them are honestly what you'd call great, though, and there is perhaps too much reliance on actors standing around while stage-hands throw stuffed cats at them. A bit more graphic and nasty than you tend to find in films from this genre, but only relatively speaking. Passes the time decently enough if low-budget horror portmanteaus from the 70s are your thing.
JT (287 KP) rated The Upside (2019) in Movies
Mar 10, 2020
Neil Burger’s remake of 2011 French original The Intouchables pairs Kevin Hart and Bryan Cranston in a heartwarming bromance. Ex-con Dell Scott (Hart) is looking to get back on the straight and narrow after a stint behind bars. Needing to prove to his parole officer that he is actively job hunting, he steps off the tough New York streets and accidentally into the penthouse of Philip Lacasse (Cranston), a quadriplegic in need of round the clock care.
It’s not the type of job that Dell is qualified to interview for. His dry sense of humour, however, strikes a chord with Phillip – but not his frosty assistant Yvonne Pendleton (Nicole Kidman).
Hart leaves the majority of his wise-cracking antics at the door and handles the dramatic role to great effect. One or two jokes slip through the net but they feel delivered at the right times – at least we know how a catheter is put in place.
The pair work out each other’s personalities and over time Dell discovers a love for opera while Phillip enjoys the effects of marijuana and Aretha Franklin. It rarely drifts from the storyline of the original, but it doesn’t need to do anything new to make it enjoyable.
It’s not the type of job that Dell is qualified to interview for. His dry sense of humour, however, strikes a chord with Phillip – but not his frosty assistant Yvonne Pendleton (Nicole Kidman).
Hart leaves the majority of his wise-cracking antics at the door and handles the dramatic role to great effect. One or two jokes slip through the net but they feel delivered at the right times – at least we know how a catheter is put in place.
The pair work out each other’s personalities and over time Dell discovers a love for opera while Phillip enjoys the effects of marijuana and Aretha Franklin. It rarely drifts from the storyline of the original, but it doesn’t need to do anything new to make it enjoyable.
JT (287 KP) rated Knowing (2009) in Movies
Mar 10, 2020
Contains spoilers, click to show
Nicholas Cage is one of those hit and miss actors. One minute he’s acting out of his skin and the other he’s bumbling his way through another disappointment with a quietly spoken drawl.
Knowing is a film of two halves. The first half is a well thought out disaster thriller, the second is quite simply a shambles and totally ruined it. Why you ask? SPOILER ALERT: Aliens, the ending was all linked back to beings from another planet. Why they felt the need to go down this route is beyond me? But I lost any respect for director Alex Proyas .
It’s a real shame as there were some spectacular disaster sequences that ramped up the tension. Cage was accomplished in his role and was edgy enough to win the audience over. However, that all fell away in the later stages as his acting became desperate, as he tried to clutch at emotional straws.
The film’s ending has a very ‘The Day the Earth Stood Still’ feel about it. I felt like snapping the DVD in half and mailing in personally to screen writers Ryne Douglas Pearson and Juliet Snowden. I would only recommend this for the special effects and not at all for the weak script or storyline.
Knowing is a film of two halves. The first half is a well thought out disaster thriller, the second is quite simply a shambles and totally ruined it. Why you ask? SPOILER ALERT: Aliens, the ending was all linked back to beings from another planet. Why they felt the need to go down this route is beyond me? But I lost any respect for director Alex Proyas .
It’s a real shame as there were some spectacular disaster sequences that ramped up the tension. Cage was accomplished in his role and was edgy enough to win the audience over. However, that all fell away in the later stages as his acting became desperate, as he tried to clutch at emotional straws.
The film’s ending has a very ‘The Day the Earth Stood Still’ feel about it. I felt like snapping the DVD in half and mailing in personally to screen writers Ryne Douglas Pearson and Juliet Snowden. I would only recommend this for the special effects and not at all for the weak script or storyline.
Andy K (10821 KP) Oct 19, 2018