Search
Search results
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated Phoenix Incident (2016) in Movies
Aug 6, 2019
Today’s selection, for your consideration, is another movie from the ‘found footage’ genre. I know I know. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again … ‘The Blair Witch Project’ pretty much broke ground and played out that genre in the timespan of a single film. Hear me out though, cause the folks responsible for today’s selection tapped into the world of science fiction and ufos (and somewhat of a larger budget) to make this movie and the result is I believe a movie worthy enough to add to the selection of your Friday/Saturday night scary movie marathon. I’d even give it B-Movie/Cult Film status.
‘The Phoenix Incident’ is a documentary/sci-fi/thriller written and directed by Keith Arem and stars Yuri Lowenthal, Travis Willingham, Jamie Tisdale, Liam O’Brian, James C. Burns, Troy Baker, and Michael Adamthwaite. Based on the infamous ‘Phoenix Lights’ ufo incident which occurred on Thursday, March 13th 1997, the film merges the fictional disappearance of four local men and a military conspiracy with the factual account of thousands of people seeing what was described as a squadron or fleet of ufos seen traveling from the Nevada state line all the way to Phoenix, Arizona and later as far south as Mexico. The whole event was later attributed to a series of flares deployed as part of a trading exercise by A-10 Warthogs of U.S. National Guard (accounts vary by reports made by various media, law enforcement, and military outlets).
After overcoming a brief car accident outside of town and a brief but hostile encounter with a local religious fanatic, four of the five friends take off on their ATVs for an afternoon in the desert terrain surrounding Phoenix. As the friends are traversing the terrain and recording live video of their afternoon they suddenly spot a huge military presence consisting of warplanes, troop carriers, and attack helicopters racing into the desert at high speed. Intrigued and perhaps far too curious, the group of friends decide to try and follow the aircraft further into the desert as seen through their own camera footage. Darkness soon falls and the men become witnesses themselves to the mass UFO incident occurring over their town. Soon after though, their outing descends into absolute chaos as they become witnesses to something else. Something horrifying that will lead them into the unknown where their ultimate fate will become a mystery all its own. Included with the footage of the group are interviews with family and friends of the four missing men as well as interviews with law enforcement officials who each have different theories on what happened to the four friends. Intertwined with this footage is the account of the military exercises the men witnessed by an anonymous Air Force officer and his knowledge as to what REALLY happened to the four men that evening.
For a film made on less than a million dollars, I give this one major props. It’s definitely falls into the X-Files niche only without Mulder and Scully. I’m wondering if the filmmakers weren’t fans of ‘Unsolved Mysteries’ back in the day when Robert Stack hosted cause it has a similar bone-chilling aspect too it at some points. They didn’t CGI the hell out of the special effects either which I think is a real issue today in film and television. The acting ‘doesn’t look like acting’ either. The majority of ‘footage’ genuinely looks like a bunch of friends that start off spending the day goofing off and hanging out only to have their fun filled afternoon descend into utter hell.
I’ll give this one 3 out of 5 stars. Definitely worth the money for the digital download. Watch during sunset or at night to enhance the ‘thrill factor’ and checkout the bonus features included with the film as well. You’re liable to get caught up in it though and forget it’s fiction.
Or is it?
‘The Phoenix Incident’ is a documentary/sci-fi/thriller written and directed by Keith Arem and stars Yuri Lowenthal, Travis Willingham, Jamie Tisdale, Liam O’Brian, James C. Burns, Troy Baker, and Michael Adamthwaite. Based on the infamous ‘Phoenix Lights’ ufo incident which occurred on Thursday, March 13th 1997, the film merges the fictional disappearance of four local men and a military conspiracy with the factual account of thousands of people seeing what was described as a squadron or fleet of ufos seen traveling from the Nevada state line all the way to Phoenix, Arizona and later as far south as Mexico. The whole event was later attributed to a series of flares deployed as part of a trading exercise by A-10 Warthogs of U.S. National Guard (accounts vary by reports made by various media, law enforcement, and military outlets).
After overcoming a brief car accident outside of town and a brief but hostile encounter with a local religious fanatic, four of the five friends take off on their ATVs for an afternoon in the desert terrain surrounding Phoenix. As the friends are traversing the terrain and recording live video of their afternoon they suddenly spot a huge military presence consisting of warplanes, troop carriers, and attack helicopters racing into the desert at high speed. Intrigued and perhaps far too curious, the group of friends decide to try and follow the aircraft further into the desert as seen through their own camera footage. Darkness soon falls and the men become witnesses themselves to the mass UFO incident occurring over their town. Soon after though, their outing descends into absolute chaos as they become witnesses to something else. Something horrifying that will lead them into the unknown where their ultimate fate will become a mystery all its own. Included with the footage of the group are interviews with family and friends of the four missing men as well as interviews with law enforcement officials who each have different theories on what happened to the four friends. Intertwined with this footage is the account of the military exercises the men witnessed by an anonymous Air Force officer and his knowledge as to what REALLY happened to the four men that evening.
For a film made on less than a million dollars, I give this one major props. It’s definitely falls into the X-Files niche only without Mulder and Scully. I’m wondering if the filmmakers weren’t fans of ‘Unsolved Mysteries’ back in the day when Robert Stack hosted cause it has a similar bone-chilling aspect too it at some points. They didn’t CGI the hell out of the special effects either which I think is a real issue today in film and television. The acting ‘doesn’t look like acting’ either. The majority of ‘footage’ genuinely looks like a bunch of friends that start off spending the day goofing off and hanging out only to have their fun filled afternoon descend into utter hell.
I’ll give this one 3 out of 5 stars. Definitely worth the money for the digital download. Watch during sunset or at night to enhance the ‘thrill factor’ and checkout the bonus features included with the film as well. You’re liable to get caught up in it though and forget it’s fiction.
Or is it?
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated First Man (2018) in Movies
Jul 2, 2019
As a child growing up in the 80’s the space race had already been around for decades. While I had heard the stories of my parents watching Neil Armstrong take his first steps on the moon, at the time I didn’t realize what it really took for those very first steps to occur. Considering we were living in a time full of space shuttles and satellites, it was easy to forget that only twenty years earlier we were still working on how to get a man into space.
First Man by Universal Pictures and directed by Damien Chazelle (La La Land / Whiplash) takes us on the incredible journey of Neil Armstrong (Ryan Gosling) becoming the first man on the moon. The movie covers almost a decade of time, starting with the first scene of Neil Armstrong in a high-altitude test flight in his X-15 to of course the pivotal moment when he first steps foot on the moon. It’s a lot to pack into a film that only runs a bit over 2 hours (138 minutes to be precise) so even though it doesn’t go too deep into any particular event, it shows just enough of the journey to be very captivating.
The cinematography is both beautiful and a bit unsettling at the same time. It’s grainy and shaky, looking as though the film itself was shot in the same era that it portrays. There is a blend of new footage and actual footage that is practically impossible to distinguish from each other. There were many times throughout the film where I questioned whether the footage was actually pulled from original film, or simply filmed to appear that it was. Viewers who are sensitive to shaky camera sequences (where it looks like it is being filmed using an old 8mm handheld movie camera) or for those who prefer a crisper image of grainy footage might be slightly turned off, however I found the mix of both old and new incredibly interesting and it made all of the characters appear as if they were part of an archived documentary, instead of an entirely new film.
The video wasn’t the only mix that is present in the film as there is also a blend of old and new audio footage. They even used the original recording of the moon landing and seamlessly blended Ryan Gosling’s voice in where Neil Armstrong would have originally been heard. The mix of audio footage was done so flawlessly throughout the film that you may even start to believe that that Ryan Gosling and Neil Armstrong are one-in-the-same person.
Since the movie is based on Neil Armstrong himself and not directly on the space race, a lot of other critical events are simply introduced and then gone in a flash. The time jumps in the movie can be a bit confusing as well. For example, there are scenes where his wife Janet (Claire Foy) is pregnant one minute and the very next minute she has a young son running around. Years pass by in minutes in this film, even for crucial events. Another example is when we are introduced to the young astronauts training for the Gemini flights and then a short time later they are ready to complete their missions. Considering these astronauts were an important part of history, it would have been nice to see a little bit more of their development. The best way to describe these hasty time jumps is that they play out a lot like reading a Wikipedia article, the key points are shown and described in detail, but any of the character development (outside of Neil and his wife) is largely missing. That’s not to say that there aren’t other characters in the film that are important, they just aren’t the focus of the film.
If you are looking for a film that is action oriented like Apollo 13 or The Right Stuff, then you may be a bit disappointed in First Man as it is definitely more like a documentary than a Hollywood blockbuster. If you are however interested in the history of Neil Armstrong and his trials and tribulations on his way to the first moon landing, then you will be in for an incredible journey. Even though First Man seems more at home on the History Channel than Netflix, that’s what makes it such an interesting and enjoyable movie. I thoroughly enjoyed First Man and it’s excellent blend of history and personal storytelling makes it a great movie to see with the whole family.
First Man by Universal Pictures and directed by Damien Chazelle (La La Land / Whiplash) takes us on the incredible journey of Neil Armstrong (Ryan Gosling) becoming the first man on the moon. The movie covers almost a decade of time, starting with the first scene of Neil Armstrong in a high-altitude test flight in his X-15 to of course the pivotal moment when he first steps foot on the moon. It’s a lot to pack into a film that only runs a bit over 2 hours (138 minutes to be precise) so even though it doesn’t go too deep into any particular event, it shows just enough of the journey to be very captivating.
The cinematography is both beautiful and a bit unsettling at the same time. It’s grainy and shaky, looking as though the film itself was shot in the same era that it portrays. There is a blend of new footage and actual footage that is practically impossible to distinguish from each other. There were many times throughout the film where I questioned whether the footage was actually pulled from original film, or simply filmed to appear that it was. Viewers who are sensitive to shaky camera sequences (where it looks like it is being filmed using an old 8mm handheld movie camera) or for those who prefer a crisper image of grainy footage might be slightly turned off, however I found the mix of both old and new incredibly interesting and it made all of the characters appear as if they were part of an archived documentary, instead of an entirely new film.
The video wasn’t the only mix that is present in the film as there is also a blend of old and new audio footage. They even used the original recording of the moon landing and seamlessly blended Ryan Gosling’s voice in where Neil Armstrong would have originally been heard. The mix of audio footage was done so flawlessly throughout the film that you may even start to believe that that Ryan Gosling and Neil Armstrong are one-in-the-same person.
Since the movie is based on Neil Armstrong himself and not directly on the space race, a lot of other critical events are simply introduced and then gone in a flash. The time jumps in the movie can be a bit confusing as well. For example, there are scenes where his wife Janet (Claire Foy) is pregnant one minute and the very next minute she has a young son running around. Years pass by in minutes in this film, even for crucial events. Another example is when we are introduced to the young astronauts training for the Gemini flights and then a short time later they are ready to complete their missions. Considering these astronauts were an important part of history, it would have been nice to see a little bit more of their development. The best way to describe these hasty time jumps is that they play out a lot like reading a Wikipedia article, the key points are shown and described in detail, but any of the character development (outside of Neil and his wife) is largely missing. That’s not to say that there aren’t other characters in the film that are important, they just aren’t the focus of the film.
If you are looking for a film that is action oriented like Apollo 13 or The Right Stuff, then you may be a bit disappointed in First Man as it is definitely more like a documentary than a Hollywood blockbuster. If you are however interested in the history of Neil Armstrong and his trials and tribulations on his way to the first moon landing, then you will be in for an incredible journey. Even though First Man seems more at home on the History Channel than Netflix, that’s what makes it such an interesting and enjoyable movie. I thoroughly enjoyed First Man and it’s excellent blend of history and personal storytelling makes it a great movie to see with the whole family.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated They Shall Not Grow Old (2018) in Movies
Sep 28, 2021
We DO remember them.
“Trapped in a Charlie Chaplin World”. So says director Peter Jackson in a post-screening discussion with Mark Kermode, describing early black and white documentary footage. Whereas modern film runs at 24 fps, most of the old footage is hand cranked, with speeds as low as 12 fps which leads to its jerky nature. Jackson in this project with the Imperial War Museum took their WW1 footage and put it through a ‘pipeline process. This cleaned-up and restored the original footage; used clever computer interpolation to add in the missing 6 to 12 frames per second; and then colourised it.
The results are outstanding. Jackson wisely focuses the film on the specific slice of WW1 action from the trenches. And those anonymous figures become real, live, breathing humans on screen. It is obviously tragic that some (and as commented by Jackson, many in one scene) are not to be breathing humans for much longer.
These effects take a while to kick in. The early scenes in the documentary are in the original black and white, describing the recruitment process, and how many of the recruits were under-age. (To explain the varied comments in the film, they should have been 18, although officially shouldn’t have been sent overseas until 19).
It is when the troops arrive in France that we suddenly go from black-and-white to the fully restored and colourised footage, and it is a gasp-inducing moment.
Audio magic
All of the audio commentary is from original BBC recordings of war veterans recounting their actual experiences in the trench. Some sound like heroes; some sound like rogues; all came out changed men. Supporting music of WW1 ditties, including the incredibly rude “Mademoiselle from Armentières” over the end credits, is provided by Plan 9.
But equally impressive is the dubbing of the characters onscreen. Jackson employed forensic lip-readers to determine what the soldiers on-screen were saying, and reproduced the speech using appropriate regional accents for the regiments concerned. Jackson also recounts how the words associated with a “pep-talk” speech to troops by an officer he found on an original slip of paper within the regimental records: outstanding. Added sound effects include real-life shelling by the New Zealand army. It all adds to the overall atmosphere of the film.
3D = less
The film itself is a masterpiece of technical innovation that will change in the future the way in which we should be able to see this sort of early film footage forever. As a documentary it’s near-perfection. But if I have a criticism of the cinema showing I attended it is that the 3D tended to detract rather than add to the film. Perhaps this is just my eyesight, but 3D always tends to make images slightly more blurry. Where (like “Gravity”) there are great 3D effects to showcase, it’s worth the slight negative to get the massive positive. But here, there was no such benefit: 2D would have been better. For those in the UK (and possibly through other broadcasters worldwide) the film is being shown on BBC2 tonight (11/11/18) at 9:30: I will be watching it again to compare and contrast.
Final Thoughts
Jackson dedicated the film to his grandfather. And almost all of us Brits will have relatives affected by this “war to end all wars”. In my case, my grandfather was shot and severely wounded at Leuze Wood on the Somme, lying in the mud for four days and four nights before being recovered… by the Germans! Fortunately he was well-treated and, although dying young, recovered enough to father my father – else I wouldn’t be here today writing this. On this Rememberance Sunday, 100 years on, it is a time for us to truly remember the sacrifice these men and boys gave to what, all in the film agree, was a pretty obstinate and pointless conflict.
I’ll finish the review by reproducing one of the war poems of my wife’s Uncle Ivor (available in a collection here), written on 11/11/18 a hundred years ago:
Peace
At last O Lord the Day has come,
And hushed is now the noise of guns.
Peace is proclaimed over land and sea,
Our heartfelt thanks we give to Thee.
I thank thee Father for Thy care,
That thou hasn’t answered all my prayers.
This day I see in manhood’s strength,
The Peace we longed for, come at length.
O may my future actions be,
Worthy of all Thy care to me.
Let me forget not Thy Great Love,
Remembering chums who live Above.
I.G.H. 11/11/1918, France.
The results are outstanding. Jackson wisely focuses the film on the specific slice of WW1 action from the trenches. And those anonymous figures become real, live, breathing humans on screen. It is obviously tragic that some (and as commented by Jackson, many in one scene) are not to be breathing humans for much longer.
These effects take a while to kick in. The early scenes in the documentary are in the original black and white, describing the recruitment process, and how many of the recruits were under-age. (To explain the varied comments in the film, they should have been 18, although officially shouldn’t have been sent overseas until 19).
It is when the troops arrive in France that we suddenly go from black-and-white to the fully restored and colourised footage, and it is a gasp-inducing moment.
Audio magic
All of the audio commentary is from original BBC recordings of war veterans recounting their actual experiences in the trench. Some sound like heroes; some sound like rogues; all came out changed men. Supporting music of WW1 ditties, including the incredibly rude “Mademoiselle from Armentières” over the end credits, is provided by Plan 9.
But equally impressive is the dubbing of the characters onscreen. Jackson employed forensic lip-readers to determine what the soldiers on-screen were saying, and reproduced the speech using appropriate regional accents for the regiments concerned. Jackson also recounts how the words associated with a “pep-talk” speech to troops by an officer he found on an original slip of paper within the regimental records: outstanding. Added sound effects include real-life shelling by the New Zealand army. It all adds to the overall atmosphere of the film.
3D = less
The film itself is a masterpiece of technical innovation that will change in the future the way in which we should be able to see this sort of early film footage forever. As a documentary it’s near-perfection. But if I have a criticism of the cinema showing I attended it is that the 3D tended to detract rather than add to the film. Perhaps this is just my eyesight, but 3D always tends to make images slightly more blurry. Where (like “Gravity”) there are great 3D effects to showcase, it’s worth the slight negative to get the massive positive. But here, there was no such benefit: 2D would have been better. For those in the UK (and possibly through other broadcasters worldwide) the film is being shown on BBC2 tonight (11/11/18) at 9:30: I will be watching it again to compare and contrast.
Final Thoughts
Jackson dedicated the film to his grandfather. And almost all of us Brits will have relatives affected by this “war to end all wars”. In my case, my grandfather was shot and severely wounded at Leuze Wood on the Somme, lying in the mud for four days and four nights before being recovered… by the Germans! Fortunately he was well-treated and, although dying young, recovered enough to father my father – else I wouldn’t be here today writing this. On this Rememberance Sunday, 100 years on, it is a time for us to truly remember the sacrifice these men and boys gave to what, all in the film agree, was a pretty obstinate and pointless conflict.
I’ll finish the review by reproducing one of the war poems of my wife’s Uncle Ivor (available in a collection here), written on 11/11/18 a hundred years ago:
Peace
At last O Lord the Day has come,
And hushed is now the noise of guns.
Peace is proclaimed over land and sea,
Our heartfelt thanks we give to Thee.
I thank thee Father for Thy care,
That thou hasn’t answered all my prayers.
This day I see in manhood’s strength,
The Peace we longed for, come at length.
O may my future actions be,
Worthy of all Thy care to me.
Let me forget not Thy Great Love,
Remembering chums who live Above.
I.G.H. 11/11/1918, France.
Darren (1599 KP) rated REC (2007) in Movies
Jun 20, 2019
Story: [Rec] starts as reporter Angela Vidal (Velasco) is cover the local firefighter department for her latest report on While You’re Sleeping. The first incident the team gets called to is a domestic disturbance case inside an apartment building.
What seems like a simple and even boring story to cover quickly turns into a battle of life and death when the woman causing the disturbance attacks the police officer sent to help. The make the matters worse the people find themselves trapped inside the building which has been locked down by the authorities refusing to let anybody out. When the infection continues to spread, Angela must find a way to survive the terror inside the building and learn the truth about the source of the virus.
Thoughts on [Rec]
Characters/Performance – Angela is the reporter that is covering a simple story but finds herself fighting for her life but wanting to report every single part of the story for her audience. The rest of the characters are cops, firefighters, residents of the apartment and the cameraman.
Performance wise, Velasco is good as the main screen attraction for this film, with everyone else all doing a great job with their roles through the film.
Story – The story is simple to follow, people get trapped in a building as a virus is spreading through the people inside making them killing machines and the ones not infected need to find a way to survive. This all works and the added found footage keeps us believe this could be a breaking story unfolding.
REPORT THIS AD
Horror/Mystery – The horror is very good with each corner potentially having a threat as well as each character not knowing what is happening which I think adds to any horror element.
Settings – The whole film is set within the apartment complex which adds to the tension and horror unfolding through the film.
Special Effects – The special effects all great to with most being practical effects when it comes to the gore required.
Final Thoughts – This is a great atmospheric horror that is short, sweet and hits all the marks for found footage horror needs.
Overall: One for all the horror fans out there.
https://moviesreview101.com/2018/03/10/original-v-remake-rec-2007/
What seems like a simple and even boring story to cover quickly turns into a battle of life and death when the woman causing the disturbance attacks the police officer sent to help. The make the matters worse the people find themselves trapped inside the building which has been locked down by the authorities refusing to let anybody out. When the infection continues to spread, Angela must find a way to survive the terror inside the building and learn the truth about the source of the virus.
Thoughts on [Rec]
Characters/Performance – Angela is the reporter that is covering a simple story but finds herself fighting for her life but wanting to report every single part of the story for her audience. The rest of the characters are cops, firefighters, residents of the apartment and the cameraman.
Performance wise, Velasco is good as the main screen attraction for this film, with everyone else all doing a great job with their roles through the film.
Story – The story is simple to follow, people get trapped in a building as a virus is spreading through the people inside making them killing machines and the ones not infected need to find a way to survive. This all works and the added found footage keeps us believe this could be a breaking story unfolding.
REPORT THIS AD
Horror/Mystery – The horror is very good with each corner potentially having a threat as well as each character not knowing what is happening which I think adds to any horror element.
Settings – The whole film is set within the apartment complex which adds to the tension and horror unfolding through the film.
Special Effects – The special effects all great to with most being practical effects when it comes to the gore required.
Final Thoughts – This is a great atmospheric horror that is short, sweet and hits all the marks for found footage horror needs.
Overall: One for all the horror fans out there.
https://moviesreview101.com/2018/03/10/original-v-remake-rec-2007/
Darren (1599 KP) rated Out of the Shadows (2017) in Movies
Oct 24, 2019
Story: Out of the Shadows starts as we follow a paranormal investigation team looking to recruit the only known survivor Carter (Kellogg) to join them as they search the answers about what happened on his famous activity tape.
With the team in place the teams sets up the cameras around the asylum with team member Cynthia (Morrison) getting the first does of activity in a communication from her father, whom went missing in asylum with Carter’s team. Using her as bait the team record her time inside the asylum as they look to explain the unexplainable.
Thoughts on Out of the Shadows
Characters – Carter is the lone survivor from a previous encounter inside the asylum, he goes back but could have his own motivation for this. Cynthia is searching for her father who went missing but the rest of the characters are just another mix of the crew you would expect on a paranormal investigation team.
Performances – The performances across the board are not the best, the crew does feel like it could be a real documentary crew at times but then other times its just a group of actors trying to overreact to everything going on.
Story – The story does have a good twist, which is the only interesting part of the story, it is nearly 90 minutes investigating the shadows with too many characters to follow, it gets difficult to follow the characters in the dark for the most part and as for the reasoning behind everything well, it doesn’t seem to have one.
Horror – The horror is a lot of jumping at the camera or activity happening behind the camera, it isn’t scary but will give you a forced jump.
Settings – The film could easily have only had one setting, the asylum but going back to the motel makes it feel like the evil could escape which does try to make it stand out from just a haunted asylum movie.
Special Effects – The effects are what you would expect for a found footage film, they work without being ground breaking.
Scene of the Movie – Welcome to the Devil’s Toy Box.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – The scares were too random.
Final Thoughts –This is a disappointing and mostly dull horror movie, the jumps are too random, the characters don’t make smart decisions and found footage only works in places.
Overall: Horror film to skip by the end.
With the team in place the teams sets up the cameras around the asylum with team member Cynthia (Morrison) getting the first does of activity in a communication from her father, whom went missing in asylum with Carter’s team. Using her as bait the team record her time inside the asylum as they look to explain the unexplainable.
Thoughts on Out of the Shadows
Characters – Carter is the lone survivor from a previous encounter inside the asylum, he goes back but could have his own motivation for this. Cynthia is searching for her father who went missing but the rest of the characters are just another mix of the crew you would expect on a paranormal investigation team.
Performances – The performances across the board are not the best, the crew does feel like it could be a real documentary crew at times but then other times its just a group of actors trying to overreact to everything going on.
Story – The story does have a good twist, which is the only interesting part of the story, it is nearly 90 minutes investigating the shadows with too many characters to follow, it gets difficult to follow the characters in the dark for the most part and as for the reasoning behind everything well, it doesn’t seem to have one.
Horror – The horror is a lot of jumping at the camera or activity happening behind the camera, it isn’t scary but will give you a forced jump.
Settings – The film could easily have only had one setting, the asylum but going back to the motel makes it feel like the evil could escape which does try to make it stand out from just a haunted asylum movie.
Special Effects – The effects are what you would expect for a found footage film, they work without being ground breaking.
Scene of the Movie – Welcome to the Devil’s Toy Box.
That Moment That Annoyed Me – The scares were too random.
Final Thoughts –This is a disappointing and mostly dull horror movie, the jumps are too random, the characters don’t make smart decisions and found footage only works in places.
Overall: Horror film to skip by the end.
Kevin Wilson (179 KP) rated The Dinosaur Project (2012) in Movies
Jul 22, 2018
I stuck with it (1 more)
I've seen worse CGI and acting
Forgettable movie (2 more)
Not enough dinosaurs
Boring
Blair witch project meets Jurassic park?
Yet another £1 movie I discovered and I have to say it is not worth it. That is 1 hour and 20 mins I will never get back.
The front of the blu ray case says 'the best Dino film since Jurassic park". That is laughable. It might as well have been a monster movie because I did not see that many dinosaurs. Maybe 3 different types?
This is a found footage movie. This genre has been, I feel, exhausted. It is no longer fresh and unique. It felt a lot like Blair witch project with them trying to build a suspense but that was not there. A fear of the unknown which meant there was no action.
The acting isnt horrible and neither is the CGI. Only good things about it I guess. But the characters were forgettable and their relationships were not believable.
It is badly paced with a lot of slow talking scenes while doing a lot of travelling. It is a predictable movie with an obvious betrayal and and ending.
The front of the blu ray case says 'the best Dino film since Jurassic park". That is laughable. It might as well have been a monster movie because I did not see that many dinosaurs. Maybe 3 different types?
This is a found footage movie. This genre has been, I feel, exhausted. It is no longer fresh and unique. It felt a lot like Blair witch project with them trying to build a suspense but that was not there. A fear of the unknown which meant there was no action.
The acting isnt horrible and neither is the CGI. Only good things about it I guess. But the characters were forgettable and their relationships were not believable.
It is badly paced with a lot of slow talking scenes while doing a lot of travelling. It is a predictable movie with an obvious betrayal and and ending.
LeftSideCut (3778 KP) rated Spree (2020) in Movies
Jan 5, 2021
I honestly can't figure out if I thought this was good or not...
Starting with the positives then. I thought the premise was decent. An amateur streamer who has spent the best part of a decade failing to gain numbers via his social media accounts, embarks on a killing spree during his day job as a taxi driver, whilst simultaneously live streaming the whole thing. Stranger Things' Joe Keery plays the killer in question, and does a pretty decent job at portraying an unhinged, isolated young adult who is just obsessed with fame.
I also enjoyed both Sasheer Zamata and David Arquette in supporting roles.
It's a very styalised movie - the whole runtime is shown through streaming mediums, essentially being a semi found footage horror, and it works for the most part.
However, I've never been the biggest fan of this particular sub genre, and I found myself losing interest now and again. It's trying very hard to be modern and relevant, which it sort of is, but I'm not sure how far it will go in resonating with a younger generation. A lot of the script is cringey in it attempts to throw current slang terms in at every given moment. I've even heard Spree described as "Taxi Driver for the Instagram generation", a bold claim that falls way short in reality, even if that was Eugene Kotlyarenko's intention.
All in all, Spree manages to remain entertaining enough to warrant sitting through it, and that's mainly thanks to Joe Keery's weirdly uncomfortable performance. Maybe knock back a beer or two at the same time for good measure.
Starting with the positives then. I thought the premise was decent. An amateur streamer who has spent the best part of a decade failing to gain numbers via his social media accounts, embarks on a killing spree during his day job as a taxi driver, whilst simultaneously live streaming the whole thing. Stranger Things' Joe Keery plays the killer in question, and does a pretty decent job at portraying an unhinged, isolated young adult who is just obsessed with fame.
I also enjoyed both Sasheer Zamata and David Arquette in supporting roles.
It's a very styalised movie - the whole runtime is shown through streaming mediums, essentially being a semi found footage horror, and it works for the most part.
However, I've never been the biggest fan of this particular sub genre, and I found myself losing interest now and again. It's trying very hard to be modern and relevant, which it sort of is, but I'm not sure how far it will go in resonating with a younger generation. A lot of the script is cringey in it attempts to throw current slang terms in at every given moment. I've even heard Spree described as "Taxi Driver for the Instagram generation", a bold claim that falls way short in reality, even if that was Eugene Kotlyarenko's intention.
All in all, Spree manages to remain entertaining enough to warrant sitting through it, and that's mainly thanks to Joe Keery's weirdly uncomfortable performance. Maybe knock back a beer or two at the same time for good measure.
Scott Tostik (389 KP) rated Haunt (2019) in Movies
Sep 29, 2019
Over the past few years, found footage films about Extreme Halloween Haunts have kind of damaged the product a little. The Houses October Built being the best of the worst in my opinion.
Last year we had HellFest and another one that I forgot...
So I went in to Haunt with no idea what was going to happen... Nor did I really care.
Until the mayhem begun. The absolute carnage that follows these folks around is both refreshing and disturbing all the same.
These people, hidden beneath the masks of the holiday.... Yeah, fuck off. Halloween in my Christmas.... Are equally disturbing masks of self expression and self loathing.
Overall this movie shocked me into a 9 rating. It was nice to see a horror film full of "teens" who's first thought was "How do we get out?". Instead of "Hey that big scary man is pointing towards a dark room with a machete... Lets go fuck in that room,"
Smart characters are so refreshing.
Thanks modern day horror for ending the drought of dumbasses... For now.
While it wasn't a new idea.Haunt is in fact quite Haunting... Oh boy...
And it does leave the viewer... This viewer... Satisfied with 90 minutes well spent.
Last year we had HellFest and another one that I forgot...
So I went in to Haunt with no idea what was going to happen... Nor did I really care.
Until the mayhem begun. The absolute carnage that follows these folks around is both refreshing and disturbing all the same.
These people, hidden beneath the masks of the holiday.... Yeah, fuck off. Halloween in my Christmas.... Are equally disturbing masks of self expression and self loathing.
Overall this movie shocked me into a 9 rating. It was nice to see a horror film full of "teens" who's first thought was "How do we get out?". Instead of "Hey that big scary man is pointing towards a dark room with a machete... Lets go fuck in that room,"
Smart characters are so refreshing.
Thanks modern day horror for ending the drought of dumbasses... For now.
While it wasn't a new idea.Haunt is in fact quite Haunting... Oh boy...
And it does leave the viewer... This viewer... Satisfied with 90 minutes well spent.
Gareth von Kallenbach (971 KP) rated Sinister (2012) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
Sinister is a movie that surprised me. I love scary movies, but most of the time it is the pure humor that I find in what people think is scary these days that makes me love them. I figured I would walk into this movie and leave in the same mood I always do. Laughing about how many people jumped in the theater because of what happened on screen. But, this time, I was one of those people. For the first time in over a decade I found a scary movie that downright creeped me out and made me jump. Not just once, more several times.
Sinister opens with old super-8 footage of a family of four being hung from a tree in a rather unique way. The movie is set in a small town in Pennsylvania where Ellison Oswalt (Ethan Hawke; Training Day, Daybreakers) and his family (wife, daughter and son) are moving into a new house. Ellison is a true-crime writer, who hasn’t had a best-selling book in 10 years. His work in the true-crime field did not garner him any favor with the local law enforcement, and the Sheriff in particular would rather see him leave. Shortly, we realize that the house the Oswalt family has moved into the same house that the family in the opening scene lived in, this family is the basis for the book he is writing, and the house is also where they were murdered. This is unbeknownst to the family, except for Ellison himself.
Ellison finds a box in the addicts that is labeled home movies, and it contains several reels of super-8 footage. This footage helps him realize how and why the family from the opening scene were murdered, and their murders spanning from the late 60s to present day. Even more daunting, his discoveries as he moves forward in his investigation place his entire family in the path of a supernatural entity.
I am a firm believer that a film’s score can make or break a movie, despite how good the story is. Sinister did not fail in this department. With haunting melodies littered throughout the movie, and excellent timing by all punctuations, this film will definitely have you tense at exactly the right moments. The one bad thing I can say about this movie, and it was really more of a distraction than a bad thing, was Ethan Hawke’s voice. His voice seemed unnaturally deep compared to my experience with him in his previous roles, a thought which was echoed by many of my fellow critics in the theater. Overall, though, the movie was fantastic. With two interesting cameos in the movie, and a great little role for James Ransone (Inside Man, The Next Three Days), a relative known, and stellar acting from Ethan Hawke, this is a definite must see. Especially for date night, if you’re significant other is into scary movies that is.
Sinister opens with old super-8 footage of a family of four being hung from a tree in a rather unique way. The movie is set in a small town in Pennsylvania where Ellison Oswalt (Ethan Hawke; Training Day, Daybreakers) and his family (wife, daughter and son) are moving into a new house. Ellison is a true-crime writer, who hasn’t had a best-selling book in 10 years. His work in the true-crime field did not garner him any favor with the local law enforcement, and the Sheriff in particular would rather see him leave. Shortly, we realize that the house the Oswalt family has moved into the same house that the family in the opening scene lived in, this family is the basis for the book he is writing, and the house is also where they were murdered. This is unbeknownst to the family, except for Ellison himself.
Ellison finds a box in the addicts that is labeled home movies, and it contains several reels of super-8 footage. This footage helps him realize how and why the family from the opening scene were murdered, and their murders spanning from the late 60s to present day. Even more daunting, his discoveries as he moves forward in his investigation place his entire family in the path of a supernatural entity.
I am a firm believer that a film’s score can make or break a movie, despite how good the story is. Sinister did not fail in this department. With haunting melodies littered throughout the movie, and excellent timing by all punctuations, this film will definitely have you tense at exactly the right moments. The one bad thing I can say about this movie, and it was really more of a distraction than a bad thing, was Ethan Hawke’s voice. His voice seemed unnaturally deep compared to my experience with him in his previous roles, a thought which was echoed by many of my fellow critics in the theater. Overall, though, the movie was fantastic. With two interesting cameos in the movie, and a great little role for James Ransone (Inside Man, The Next Three Days), a relative known, and stellar acting from Ethan Hawke, this is a definite must see. Especially for date night, if you’re significant other is into scary movies that is.
Housewife of Horror (12 KP) rated The Canal (2014) in Movies
Aug 25, 2018
Contains spoilers, click to show
The Canal (2014)
Platform: Shudder
Genre: Horror
Country: Ireland (IFB)
Running Time: 92 minutes
Written and Directed by: Ivan Kavanagh
Release Date: April 18th 2014 (Tribeca Film Festival)
Cast: Rupert Evans; Steve Oram; Antonia Campbell-Hughes; Hannah Hoekstra
After found footage, psychological horror films are a favorite of mine. I love how they pull you into the story, how up is down, left is right, I love to be enveloped by the plot. That tingly feeling I get on the back of my neck, the hairs standing up, I know then it has me in it’s clutches. I had that feeling with The Canal.
David (Rupert Evans) works as a film archivist, he is given a reel of footage from the police archives to watch and subsequently archive by his work colleague and close friend Claire (Antonia Campbell-Hughes), which turns out to be old crime scene footage of he and his wife’s current home. It was the scene of a shocking crime in 1902, the brutal murder of a cheating wife, their children and the nanny by the enraged father.
David suspects his wife Alice (Hannah Hoekstra) of having an affair, so he decides to follow her one night, only to unfortunately confirm his suspicions. He watches Alice while she is with her lover, and then picking up a hammer, he appears to mull over the idea of using it, only to quickly come to his senses. Walking away, he throws the hammer in to the canal on the way back to their marital home, where he has left their young son asleep in bed, alone in the house.
David, feeling sick from what he witnessed, as well as what he had considered doing about it, runs into the (quite dirty) canal-side public toilets. He hears something or someone coming in after him, and then see’s them, their feet, under the stall door, followed by fingers appearing to creep over the top of the door. He then proceeds to suffer from quite nightmarish visions that include the man, the husband, from the 1902 crime scene footage. He seems to be taunting David, whispering things to him. David, in a state of distress, manages to crawl outside, where he then witnesses what appears to be his wife being thrown into the canal; he just can’t see it very clearly or coherently. He later comes round on the floor of the bathroom, unnerved and disheveled, and makes his way home. The next morning, when he realises that Alice has not come home that night, David goes to the local police station to report her missing. Obviously, the police suspect David, “It’s always the husband” says the (inept) detective on the case.
The plot twists and turns, is it David? Is it the entity? Some great revelations about the grim history of the house come up throughout. It’s an interesting watch that comes to a disturbing conclusion.
A great little scene, that made me believe David was the killer, was during one of his viewings of the old footage. He stood up, in front of the projector, silhouetting him in front of the screen, making him appear to be a dark shadow. To me, this was the directors’ nod to David’s darkness within.
The Canal is a great psychological horror; it does very well to dig itself under your skin as you watch, and drag you in to this nightmare that David’s life has turned into. I was really impressed with the performance of Rupert Evans, tormented and devastated, he made David’s pain almost tangible. Watching him seemingly fall further into madness as the story progressed was quite frightening. I really felt for the nanny, she is a totally innocent girl who just wants to protect David and Alice’s son Billy, and can’t leave even when she knows she should. She gets dragged deeper and deeper in to the madness; everyone close to David is brought into this waking nightmare.
The ending is well, quite creepy and rather disturbing as I have said earlier. The story feels to me to have come full circle, and you can envision that it is a tormenting nightmare that will repeat itself over and over with future residents of the house for years to come.
4/5 – It’s rather worth a look if you like a good psychological horror
Lesley-Ann (Housewife of Horror)
Platform: Shudder
Genre: Horror
Country: Ireland (IFB)
Running Time: 92 minutes
Written and Directed by: Ivan Kavanagh
Release Date: April 18th 2014 (Tribeca Film Festival)
Cast: Rupert Evans; Steve Oram; Antonia Campbell-Hughes; Hannah Hoekstra
After found footage, psychological horror films are a favorite of mine. I love how they pull you into the story, how up is down, left is right, I love to be enveloped by the plot. That tingly feeling I get on the back of my neck, the hairs standing up, I know then it has me in it’s clutches. I had that feeling with The Canal.
David (Rupert Evans) works as a film archivist, he is given a reel of footage from the police archives to watch and subsequently archive by his work colleague and close friend Claire (Antonia Campbell-Hughes), which turns out to be old crime scene footage of he and his wife’s current home. It was the scene of a shocking crime in 1902, the brutal murder of a cheating wife, their children and the nanny by the enraged father.
David suspects his wife Alice (Hannah Hoekstra) of having an affair, so he decides to follow her one night, only to unfortunately confirm his suspicions. He watches Alice while she is with her lover, and then picking up a hammer, he appears to mull over the idea of using it, only to quickly come to his senses. Walking away, he throws the hammer in to the canal on the way back to their marital home, where he has left their young son asleep in bed, alone in the house.
David, feeling sick from what he witnessed, as well as what he had considered doing about it, runs into the (quite dirty) canal-side public toilets. He hears something or someone coming in after him, and then see’s them, their feet, under the stall door, followed by fingers appearing to creep over the top of the door. He then proceeds to suffer from quite nightmarish visions that include the man, the husband, from the 1902 crime scene footage. He seems to be taunting David, whispering things to him. David, in a state of distress, manages to crawl outside, where he then witnesses what appears to be his wife being thrown into the canal; he just can’t see it very clearly or coherently. He later comes round on the floor of the bathroom, unnerved and disheveled, and makes his way home. The next morning, when he realises that Alice has not come home that night, David goes to the local police station to report her missing. Obviously, the police suspect David, “It’s always the husband” says the (inept) detective on the case.
The plot twists and turns, is it David? Is it the entity? Some great revelations about the grim history of the house come up throughout. It’s an interesting watch that comes to a disturbing conclusion.
A great little scene, that made me believe David was the killer, was during one of his viewings of the old footage. He stood up, in front of the projector, silhouetting him in front of the screen, making him appear to be a dark shadow. To me, this was the directors’ nod to David’s darkness within.
The Canal is a great psychological horror; it does very well to dig itself under your skin as you watch, and drag you in to this nightmare that David’s life has turned into. I was really impressed with the performance of Rupert Evans, tormented and devastated, he made David’s pain almost tangible. Watching him seemingly fall further into madness as the story progressed was quite frightening. I really felt for the nanny, she is a totally innocent girl who just wants to protect David and Alice’s son Billy, and can’t leave even when she knows she should. She gets dragged deeper and deeper in to the madness; everyone close to David is brought into this waking nightmare.
The ending is well, quite creepy and rather disturbing as I have said earlier. The story feels to me to have come full circle, and you can envision that it is a tormenting nightmare that will repeat itself over and over with future residents of the house for years to come.
4/5 – It’s rather worth a look if you like a good psychological horror
Lesley-Ann (Housewife of Horror)