Reviews

12 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
3/10
It's only a movie...
15 September 2002
Warning: Spoilers
'Last House...' is a notorious film, because of its theme of rape, murder & vengeance and the often disturbing graphic violence and I admit I was interested in this film, not only because it was made by the man who gave us genre classics like 'Nightmare on Elm St', 'Serpent and the Rainbow', and 'Scream' but also because of its dubious reputation, especially in countries like the UK where this film was, or still is, banned (it will be released on DVD in the UK soon ,with about 31 seconds cut).

There are many similarities with 'I spit on your Grave' another 'video nasty' (which was even more heavily cut in the UK in order to make a release on video possible), but there is also an important difference: 'Last House' was created by a skillful director, someone who had it in him to make a truly good horror film, whereas 'I Spit' is far more of an exploitation film (and therefore in many ways even more disturbing).

However, 'Last House' is by no means flawless, and the excuse of the shoestring budget does not hold up totally. So many things have been said and written about this film and I know it has many fans who will defend till the end, but the acting is plain BAD. Krug is such a bad guy, it's almost laughable (I love the scene with the wee boy and the balloon!) and (I know it has been mentioned in earlier reviews...) what about these stupid cops!

I've heard the new DVD edition comes with a commentary by Wes Craven and Sean S. Cunningham and I would love to hear them responding to some bizarre scenes. For example, The daughter is moving when her parents find her, and I was surprised to see that she was still alive (she is moving her head and her eyes). However, one second later her father says something like "she's dead, there's nothing more we can do". And I tell you the girl was moving, not like an extremely bad actress would move who cannot 'play dead' but really moving!
4 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Highly entertaining in spite of plotholes
4 June 2002
Warning: Spoilers
I had read some bad reviews before actually seeing this film so I was prepared for the worst. I have to say that the film was way better than I had expected it to be. Mind you, it is no masterpiece, but 'The Time Machine' is highly entertaining and benefits from its relatively short running time. Most blockbusters nowadays suffer from overlong running times, often dragging on, whereas they could easily have done with 20 minutes less.

I have always liked the story by H.G. Wells, but this film is by no means a faithful adaption of this book, however, it is a sometimes inventive Hollywood take on the book. I haven't seen the 1960 adaption but most people in this review section seem to perceive this film as a remake of the 1960 film, but I see it more as a second movie adaption (Tim Burton will probably say Simon Wells 're-invented' the story :-) ).

As I have said, the film is better than the bad reviews would suggest, but still you would have expected more of it just judging from the trailer and the multi-million dollar budget. So although I had a good time watching this film I can point out many weaknesses, e.g. the numerous plotholes.

*** SPOILER!!! ***

One reviewer mentioned what he regarded as a plothole: in the beginning Hartdegen is unable to change the past (the killing of his lover) and later on he is planning to change the future (i.e. the Eloi's past). The fact that he was unable to prevent the killing of his girl, was not due to some mysterious cosmic law saying that you cannot cheat fate/destiny. His girlfriend had to be killed because otherwise he would not have invented the time machine and could not have been in the past. His wife's dead led him to lock himself in his lab and work day and night on the time machine for four years. I'm not sure whether this is how time travelling would really work, but I'm afraid that time travel films always lead to this type of discussions. I can think of only one film, 'Austin Powers: The Spy Who Shagged Me', where there was no discussion possible because of a 'disclaimer' uttered by Basil in the film (paraphrase): 'don't worry about any details, just enjoy yourself'. And I guess that goes for 'The Time Machine' as well.
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
I've got two words for you: 'Keep it real.' 'It' ain't a real word, it's short for 'innit' innit!
21 April 2002
As an Ali G fan I was afraid of being disappointed by Ali G Indahouse, but I have to say that it exceeded my expectations. Although this film cannot be described as a masterpiece for various obvious reasons, such as low production values, and a virtually non-existing script, the movie succeeds in being extremely funny. I've seen this film twice already now and it's the first time in years that I actually bothered to go see a film a second time in the cinema.
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Get Carter (2000)
Not really worth the wait...
21 April 2002
As a Sylvester Stallone fan, the UK, and Glasgow in particular, is a bad place to live. 'Get Carter' was never released in British cinemas (as far as I know), 'Driven' did not play in any of the Glaswegian cinemas, and 'D-Tox' could be seen in Glasgow for one entire week! Needless to say that I was not able to visit my local cinema during the 7 days the latter was playing.

I bought the DVD of 'Get Carter' in Holland last week, since the British DVD release date still lies 2 months ahead of us. Of course I had high expectations of this film since it was the first new Stallone film I had seen since 'Cop Land' but I should have known better. Sometimes the critics are right!

Although the film really tries to be 'stylish', with its strange camera and editing effects, it cannot hide the fact that we do not really care about what is happening. At least the film is fairly short, which does not make it too boring, but this Stallone vehicle is offensively mediocre!
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
an okay comedy
19 January 2002
I had never heard about this film when I saw it at my local cinema a couple of days but I expected an above-average comedy when I saw on the bill who had been involved in the making. When I checked out the Film on the IMDb I was surprised that the film was released under a different title (UK title: 'Evil Woman', or 'Evil Women' according to my local UGC) almost a year ago! The film is okay, there are a few good laughs but there is a feeling that we have seen it all before. They shouldn't have bothered releasing it in the cinemas almost a year after its US release. Nevertheless, I had fun watching it but I can hardly remember anything of it now, even though I saw this film 3 days ago.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Showgirls (1995)
Disappointing effort by Paul Verhoeven
6 January 2002
Paul Verhoeven is one of my favourite directors and most of his films I have seen several times. 'Showgirls' stands out because, well, because it is no masterpiece.

The problem with this film is that the story is simply too corny and uninteresting. I mean, a naive girl who wants to 'succeed' in Vegas and ends up as a fancy stripper...come on! The only thing that puzzles me is what her original plans for making a living in Vegas were...

The reason why the film was highly anticipated was that it was rumoured to become a $50 million porn flick. However, the biggest problem was that the sex and nudity, as they were eventually brought to us, simply were not extreme enough to pull in the punters. So it was given an NC-17 rating in the States, but cutting out a few seconds provided it with an R-rating. 'Turkish Delight', which Verhoeven had made little more than 20 years before 'Showgirls' (and which was voted 'Best Dutch Film of the Century' by Dutch audiences) was more explicit, but also more inventing, daring and erotic.

However, 'Showgirls' is not as bad as all those Razzies, picked up by Mr Verhoeven himself, would suggest. The film IS entertaining, slick and stylish, and should by no means be taken as seriously as it was done by most critics at the time. Still, I give this film a 4 out of 10, because Verhoeven failed to deliver what he had promised: a slick, expensive big-budget porn flick!
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
An excellent sequel
28 December 2001
I have never understood why 'Gremlins 2' wasn't a financial success. I have always loved this film. Its pace is phenomenal. The film is less dark than the original and in no way scary. I saw this film in 1990 and at that time I had not seen the first part yet so perhaps I did not have the expectations that some of fans of original had.

I think the jokes are hilarious, the special effects are amazing and many performances are outstanding, especially John Glover is great as media tycoon Clamp (I love the 'Clamp' logo by the way...). Definitely worth checking out!
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Commando (1985)
Taking out the trash
27 December 2001
Warning: Spoilers
Of course 'Commando' is one of these brilliant 1980's no-brainers with countless obvious plot holes. A recent experience made me remember one of them (I haven't seen the film in years):

*SPOILER ALERT*

In the beginning of the film we can see that Arnie's ex-Green Beret buddies are being killed off one by one. For entertainment's sake this is done in rather unconventional fashion. For example, one guy is not simply killed by putting explosives in his car or anything conventionally simple like that. No, the bad guys (one of them played by Bill Duke) come up with the following 'cunning plan' (of course this is not explained elaborately in the film but we have to assume that this is the way the plan was developped):

First they get hold of a garbage truck (probably stolen/jacked). Then they drive the truck to the victim's house in the early morning. It's is important to note that no garbage is normally collected on this day. The victim is lying in his bed with his wife, they are woken up by the noise of the garbage truck. Naturally the couple the couple is confused. Are the garbage bags collected today??? However, they come to the conclusion that 'maybe they changed the schedule'. They guy then hastily collects the garbage bags in the kitchen and approaches the garbage truck. The garbage collectors then turn out to be killers and they shoot him point blank. The killers must have made the following assumptions beforehand:

1. The noise of the garbage truck will wake up the victim or at least draw his attention.

2. The fact that he hears a (garbage) truck will make him run for the garbage bags even though according to the schedule they are not supposed to be picked up yet.

3. No-one else in the neighbourhood will make the same assumptions as the victim.

4. The victim's household is a conservative stronghold where only the man will take out the trash.

I remembered this scene (which to be honest is quite irrelevant in the film) when they collected our garbage ahead of schedule (due to Christmas) waking up me and my girlfriend. We ended up having a conversation similar to the victim in 'Commando'. Eventually I got up and ran after the garbage truck...but luckily I survived :-)
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Nighthawks (1981)
9/10
Wow...what a great film!
27 December 2001
You will hardly recognize Sylvester Stallone (sporting a full-grown beard) in this top-notch action thriller. Stallone is Deke DaSilva, a NYC cop who is part of an anti-terrorist unit. His adversary is the European (his exact nationality remains unclear) terrorist Wulfgar, played by Rutger Hauer. This film boasts several impressive suspenseful scenes that will have you on the edge of your seat. My favourite scene is the one where DaSilva and his partner spot Wulfgar in a crowded night club. The atmosphere is so tense also because of the great score by Keith Emerson. I have always loved this film and it is one of my favourite Stallone films.

The soundtrack is also a classic in my book. I bought the LP in 1988 but have been on the look-out for the CD version ever since. Definitely worth checking out should you get your hands on it somewhere!

And a final comment: Rutger Hauer is Dutch, and not German as a fellow reviewer mentioned below!
4 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
First Blood (1982)
9/10
An excellent action flick!
30 November 2001
'First Blood' proved that Sylvester Stallone did not have to wear boxing gloves to be successful. Stallone plays Rambo, a character that became even more iconic than Rocky. Although the Rambo character is often seen as a symbol for the right-wing Reagan era, the film is actually based on a 1970s novel with a definite anti-war message. Its author, John Morrell, was not too happy with the action hero John Rambo had been turned into but apparently his objections to Stallone's adjustments did not make turn down the offer to write the novelizations of the two sequels.

'First Blood' is first en foremost a solid action film with a gripping story line and some fine action scenes. In addition the film boasts strong performances by both Brian Dennehy as Will Teasle, the small town sheriff who makes the mistake of getting into Rambo's way and Richard Crenna as Rambo's former army superior Col. Samuel Trautman. It is a shame that the makers of the film decided to change the ending of the novel. The finale they have come up with instead seems somewhat of an anti-climax, as if it had been hastily changed just before the film was finished. Nevertheless I consider this film to be a true action classic.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
I.D. (1995)
8/10
a must-see film about the appeal of hooliganism
5 February 2001
I.D. tells the story of four policemen on an undercover assignment in East London. They are supposed to infiltrate the notorious hooligan firm of (non-existing) Shadwell Town Football Club. At first they are not particularly interested in football or Shadwell but they gradually learn to appreciate the particular atmosphere that is only known to football fans. John is the most fanatic of the lot. He is slowly turning into a proper hooligan. And it seems that choosing between the job and Shadwell becomes more and more difficult.

I.D. is one of my favourite films and it is definitely my favourite football-related film. It shows us what is going on in and around an unfashionable London football ground on Saturday afternoons. The character development that the main characters experience is wonderfully portrayed by the cast.

I saw this film on Dutch television for the first time. I had a very hard time finding this film on video in Holland. In fact, I never succeeded but I was delighted when I noticed that every High Street video retailer in England had a copy in stock. A must-see
13 out of 14 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Cobra (1986)
An Eighties Classic...
26 October 2000
...which does not mean that 'Cobra' is a very good film. In 1986, Stallone was riding the waves created by two back-to-back blockbusters (Rambo 2 and Rocky IV) when he tried to create a third franchise. This film is entertaining, yet the whole idea behind it (The tagline: "Crime is a disease. Meet the cure.") is repulsive. Stallone's performance can hardly be described as 'acting', however, Brigitte Nielsen's presence makes him look like Dustin Hoffman in his finest hour. Nevertheless I liked this film when I was 14 or so, so I still refer to it as a classic. We were lucky that this film didn't scoop the loot at the box office in '86, otherwise we would have been treated on some even worse sequels (although there were some persistent rumours about a 'Cobra 2' around 1990).
8 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed