Search
A Cat-Lover's Miscellany
Book
Schott's Original Miscellany was a publishing phenomenon. It sired a host of sequels and parodies....
Halloween
Book
The 1970s represented an unusually productive and innovative period for the horror film, and John...
Going Up: To Cambridge and Beyond - A Writer's Memoir
Book
The manager's name was Love. His first-floor flat was diagonally across the private road and the...
David McK (3557 KP) rated Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl (2003) in Movies
Nov 27, 2020 (Updated Nov 27, 2020)
"Captain Jack Sparrow. You are, without a doubt, the worst Pirate I have ever heard of" / "Ah, but you have heard of me ..."
The first Pirates of the Caribbean film (based on a Disney theme ride!), this is far less bloated and self referential than any of the later sequels, with Johnny Depp's portrayal of Captain Jack Sparrow a breath of fresh air (at the time) in a genre that had become increasingly stale: indeed, I can't even remember there being any other pirate films in my lifetime other than 1995s Cutthroat Island.
The plot, here, makes much use of the superstition and folklore of the Caribbean - "You better start believing in Ghost stories again, Miss: you're in one!" (to paraphrase a certain other character - with the crew of the Black Pearl all cursed to an everlasting life by an ancient Aztec curse unless they can restore all the stolen coins.
And this is where Will Turner comes in, as the son of 'Bootstrap' Bill, a colleague of Captain Jack Sparrows before his crew mutinied, stole the treasure, and were cursed. When the governors daughter Elizabet Swann is kidnapped, Turner sets off to rescue here in the company of Sparrow and a crew of n'er do wells, in a very entertaining slice of Pirate action!
The plot, here, makes much use of the superstition and folklore of the Caribbean - "You better start believing in Ghost stories again, Miss: you're in one!" (to paraphrase a certain other character - with the crew of the Black Pearl all cursed to an everlasting life by an ancient Aztec curse unless they can restore all the stolen coins.
And this is where Will Turner comes in, as the son of 'Bootstrap' Bill, a colleague of Captain Jack Sparrows before his crew mutinied, stole the treasure, and were cursed. When the governors daughter Elizabet Swann is kidnapped, Turner sets off to rescue here in the company of Sparrow and a crew of n'er do wells, in a very entertaining slice of Pirate action!
LeftSideCut (3776 KP) rated Leprechaun (1993) in Movies
Oct 19, 2020
The original Leprechaun is so so silly. It's low budget, it's brimming with unfunny jokes, it's not scary in the slightest, but dammit it's hard to hate on it too much.
The characters in Leprechaun are mostly typical easy-to-dislike personality voids (apart from my boy Ozzie), but some of the casting is notable. Of course, a pre-Friends Jennifer Aniston takes the lead and is likable enough, but the main star is obviously Warwick Davis. This being the early nineties, the horror genre was firmly set on its villains being the star, following the success of 80s icons such as Freddy Krueger, and the titular creature takes up most of the spotlight.
The Leprechaun himself is so-so. He's more of a little shit than a full blown monster, and the majority of his one liners aren't particularly funny, but Davis is clearly giving his all in this role, and is no doubt the sole reason why this movie spawned an entire franchise, even if Lep is ultimately a poor man's Chucky.
As far as cheesy horror films go, you could do a lot worse than Leprechaun (it's many sequels for example). It's cheap and trashy, but it's still pretty entertaining.
The characters in Leprechaun are mostly typical easy-to-dislike personality voids (apart from my boy Ozzie), but some of the casting is notable. Of course, a pre-Friends Jennifer Aniston takes the lead and is likable enough, but the main star is obviously Warwick Davis. This being the early nineties, the horror genre was firmly set on its villains being the star, following the success of 80s icons such as Freddy Krueger, and the titular creature takes up most of the spotlight.
The Leprechaun himself is so-so. He's more of a little shit than a full blown monster, and the majority of his one liners aren't particularly funny, but Davis is clearly giving his all in this role, and is no doubt the sole reason why this movie spawned an entire franchise, even if Lep is ultimately a poor man's Chucky.
As far as cheesy horror films go, you could do a lot worse than Leprechaun (it's many sequels for example). It's cheap and trashy, but it's still pretty entertaining.
Sarah (7800 KP) rated Friday the 13th Part 2 (1981) in Movies
Sep 30, 2019
Overrated
Out of all of the old school horror films, Friday the 13th is probably the one I like the least. Whilst it’s a great concept being set in a camp by a lake, I think it’s rather poorly and cheesily executed. I’ve seen the original many times, but this is the first time I’ve seen any of the ‘original’ sequels and I’m afraid I didn’t think much of this either.
The main problem with this is that i found Jason to be rather disappointing. Admittedly I’ve grown up with the later version of Jason (hockey mask and machete), and whilst the machete makes an appearance, I don’t find this version of Jason very scary at all. He isn’t helped by the cheesy scenes, poor script and rather bizarre fade to white scenes. It’s a shame, as the deaths are actually rather inventive but as with all 80s horrors, they’re not nearly as gruesome as they could be. Either that or I’ve become numb to the deaths after the extreme and gory modern horrors that have been out since.
Despite all of the negatives, it is still a rather silly yet enjoyable film. Just not quite the classic it’s made out to be.
The main problem with this is that i found Jason to be rather disappointing. Admittedly I’ve grown up with the later version of Jason (hockey mask and machete), and whilst the machete makes an appearance, I don’t find this version of Jason very scary at all. He isn’t helped by the cheesy scenes, poor script and rather bizarre fade to white scenes. It’s a shame, as the deaths are actually rather inventive but as with all 80s horrors, they’re not nearly as gruesome as they could be. Either that or I’ve become numb to the deaths after the extreme and gory modern horrors that have been out since.
Despite all of the negatives, it is still a rather silly yet enjoyable film. Just not quite the classic it’s made out to be.
David McK (3557 KP) rated Jurassic Park (1993) in Movies
May 26, 2020
I've just realised (at the time of writing) that this movie is nearly 30 years old.
Man, I feel old.
Taking some liberties with Michael Crichtons's source material (Hammond dies and was not a very nice man; Grant likes kids), this is a disaster movie with stunning effects (that still hold up pretty well today) for the time, even if our understanding of the 'headline' dinosaurs has changed somewhat in the intervening years since its release (Raptors were the size of chickens, had feathers, and were NOT pack hunters. or so we now think).
Set on a tropical island hit by a storm just as the owner is given a pre-release tour to special invited guests to show off his scientific breakthrough - cloned Dinosaurs, because that's ALWAYS a good idea … - a series of events leads to the power going down, and the 'exhibits' breaking free to wreak havoc amongst those guests. And, lets not kid around the bush here, despite having the likes of Samuel L Jackson, Richard Attenborough, Sam Neil, Laura Dern and - uh- Jeff Goldblum ("life, uh, finds a way") amongst the cast - the real stars are those dinosaurs.
All the sequels (4 so far, with a 5th ion the way in Jurassic World: Dominion) pale in comparison.
Man, I feel old.
Taking some liberties with Michael Crichtons's source material (Hammond dies and was not a very nice man; Grant likes kids), this is a disaster movie with stunning effects (that still hold up pretty well today) for the time, even if our understanding of the 'headline' dinosaurs has changed somewhat in the intervening years since its release (Raptors were the size of chickens, had feathers, and were NOT pack hunters. or so we now think).
Set on a tropical island hit by a storm just as the owner is given a pre-release tour to special invited guests to show off his scientific breakthrough - cloned Dinosaurs, because that's ALWAYS a good idea … - a series of events leads to the power going down, and the 'exhibits' breaking free to wreak havoc amongst those guests. And, lets not kid around the bush here, despite having the likes of Samuel L Jackson, Richard Attenborough, Sam Neil, Laura Dern and - uh- Jeff Goldblum ("life, uh, finds a way") amongst the cast - the real stars are those dinosaurs.
All the sequels (4 so far, with a 5th ion the way in Jurassic World: Dominion) pale in comparison.
Barry Newman (204 KP) rated Aliens (1986) in Movies
May 7, 2020
Revisited this for the first time in ages and there’s still no other way of describing it than simply a masterpiece. Watching the theatrical version and the slow build up of tension in the first half building up to the action packed final battle between Ripley and the alien queen is such brilliant story telling and just so well paced. James Cameron follows the Jaws approach and doesn’t show you the slightest hint of an alien till nearly an hour into the film and is far stronger for it. The whole cast are great but the films ace is of course Sigourney Weaver ,she is a total bad ass here and one of cinemas all time great heroines. You are also reminded at what a talent James Cameron was before declaring himself ‘king of the world’. I would love to see him doing something like this or T2 again rather than wasting years on the 172 sequels to Avatar that nobody really wants.
(The special edition of the film is nearly 20 minutes longer and has some interesting moments but in my opinion slows things down a bit too much and you can see why these scenes were removed for the theatrical version)
(The special edition of the film is nearly 20 minutes longer and has some interesting moments but in my opinion slows things down a bit too much and you can see why these scenes were removed for the theatrical version)
LeftSideCut (3776 KP) rated The Texas Chainsaw Massacre 2 (1986) in Movies
Jun 19, 2022
I have a huge amount of respect for TTCM2, mainly for how different it is to its predecessor, which of course happens to be one of the most respected horrors of all time. Tobe Hoopers return is a welcome one, and his desire to not repeat his original masterpiece is a smart move. It results in a slice of 80s horror that is flamboyantly ridiculous, which still manages to keep its identity intact underneath it all. There's a lot less subtlety this time around - the brooding and implied violence we have seen before is replaced with more gore and Dennis Hopper dual wielding chainsaws with a third strapped to his back. It's weirdly great. The gore is significantly upped, and Leatherface is a little more cartoony. We're also introduced to Bill Moseley as Chop-Top, a fan favourite character who is a little too slapstick for my taste, but I can't fault Moseley for 100% commiting to the bit. Caroline Williams is a delight as this entries badass final girl as well.
TTCM2 is flawed for sure, but it doesn't fall into the rinse and repeat trap that so many sequels do, and it's easy to see why it has a strong following.
TTCM2 is flawed for sure, but it doesn't fall into the rinse and repeat trap that so many sequels do, and it's easy to see why it has a strong following.
David McK (3557 KP) rated Superman II (1981) in Movies
Mar 11, 2023
KNEEL BEFORE ZOD!
Straight sequel (as in, referencing the events of the first and building on it) to the 1978 Christopher Reeve original, and there's a reason why this, for many, is held up as one of the best Superhero sequels (and Reeves as one of the best actors to portray Clarke Kent/Superman).
This is the one with (Terence Stamps version of) Zod and his fellow Krypotonian criminals - exiled to the Phantom Zone during the start of the first movie - released from captivity by an explosion in space and landing on earth to rule, just as Lois (finally) uncovers Clarke's real identity and travels with him to his Fortress of Solitude (the ramifications of which are felt in 206's Superman Returns) where he makes the decision to give up his powers and live as a mortal.
Things being what they are, this is a decision he comes to regret and has to travel back - alone - to regain his powers in order to defeat Zod and co, leading to a climactic battle in Metropolis and - later - back at that fortress of solititude.
You do have to wonder, though, how come Superman has powers here never seen or heard of again ...
This is the one with (Terence Stamps version of) Zod and his fellow Krypotonian criminals - exiled to the Phantom Zone during the start of the first movie - released from captivity by an explosion in space and landing on earth to rule, just as Lois (finally) uncovers Clarke's real identity and travels with him to his Fortress of Solitude (the ramifications of which are felt in 206's Superman Returns) where he makes the decision to give up his powers and live as a mortal.
Things being what they are, this is a decision he comes to regret and has to travel back - alone - to regain his powers in order to defeat Zod and co, leading to a climactic battle in Metropolis and - later - back at that fortress of solititude.
You do have to wonder, though, how come Superman has powers here never seen or heard of again ...