Reviews

61 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
I don't normally write reviews, but I gotta say this is the most fun I've had at a movie in a while.
28 May 2018
Warning: Spoilers
*Very minor spoiler at the bottom, will be clearly marked*

Full disclosure: I love Star Wars. I love the original trilogy and I've loved everything released under Disney so far. I even really enjoy the prequels, despite their flaws. Sadly, this statement will automatically be dismissed by "true fans". Star Wars fandom has become truly toxic, I've pretty much ignored it completely since VII was released and just made up my own damn mind. (Also a reason I rarely write reviews. My opinion doesn't really matter.)

With that out of the way; I must say I was blown away by Solo: A Star Wars Story. Now, I fully knew I'd like this movie (Hey, it's a star wars movie!). But like a lot of people, the production delays and their insistence on releasing it in May had me worried. It felt like they knew it sucked so they wanted to just get the release over with. But once the film started rolling, I was locked in, wide-eyed with a smile on my face throughout the entire thing. This movie is not a galactic-scale conflict. It's a smaller, more personal movie, which is essentially a heist/western style movie. I've heard some complaints that the film is "safe" and just a simple adventure with the characters; which is exactly what I want from these Star Wars Story films. Leave the major consequence stuff for the main saga. This film can be watched without having seen any other star wars film and you should be able to follow it fine. However, for fans, you get rewarded with tons of lore and expanded universe featured within. Alden Eherenreich did a good job as Han. Obviously nobody will ever replace Harrison Ford, but I was enjoying the movie so much, I just saw Han Solo the character. Not Alden Eherenreich the actor. Donald Glover killed it as Lando. I loved how prominent Chewbacca was in this movie. He's definitely a main character and gets some truly great moments. Woody Harrelson was great as Beckett, Han's mentor. Emilia Clarke was also great (and stunning) as Qi'Ra, Han's childhood friend.

Now, the film isn't perfect, I did have a few complaints, but they're so minor they border on nitpicking. *MINOR SPOILERS* Firstly, Lando's droid was annoying as hell. Despite having a couple of good little moments, pretty much every time she spoke I rolled my eyes. Luckily she's not in the film much. Which brings to my second complaint; not enough Lando! I also feel this movie lacked a main villain. Which wasn't a huge complaint, as I was thoroughly entertained regardless. But Paul Bettany's Dryden Vos is really only in two scenes, as a sort of looming threat. The threat established earlier on was Enfys Nest, and I felt the result of that conflict didn't really make sense for Han and Beckett's characters. But I won't say more than that.

Overall, this was a pleasantly surprising entry in the Star Wars lore. Pity it's not doing well, but I think the franchise will survive...somehow.
5 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
If this movie didn't fulfill all your theories, you have only yourself to blame.
18 December 2017
"This is not going to go the way you think." is an understatement. I rarely ever write reviews, because my opinion doesn't matter. However, I feel the need to address the vitriol against this movie. For the last two years I've listened to countless theories; Snoke is definitely this person, Rey's parents have got to be such and such. It's been relentless. Some of the theories were decent and plausible. The majority of them were idiotic. I admit that even I got caught up in a couple of them, but I wasn't committed to any particular theory. When finally watching the film, I feel my experience was partly ruined because when certain things happened I kept thinking "Oh no, that's really going to piss people off.". Then I snapped out of it and realized that I didn't care what people think. I loved every second of this film and now that I've had time to process it, I'm glad they went in the direction they did for the majority of the big "mysteries". If you've been discussing, deconstructing and committing to certain ideas of how the movie is going to play out, you've just set yourself up for major disappointments.

This movie definitely didn't play out how I expected in almost every scene, which I was pleased to see that a Star Wars movie could still surprise me.

So maybe take some time, think about this and give it another watch. See if your opinion changes.
8 out of 21 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
It's the fifth film, you know what you're getting by now.
25 June 2017
I rarely write reviews, but I'm actually surprised about how harshly this is getting bashed. Well, I'm not *that* surprised. All the Transformer films get eviscerated by critics. So I don't put much stock in reviews. All I'll say is; it's more of the same. If you like the previous 4 films, you'll like this one. I enjoy them all for what they are; cheesy popcorn movies. I personally think this film improves on Age of Extinction. Both Mark Wahlberg and Laura Haddock's characters had equally important roles. Unlike the first three films where Sam was always "The Chosen One" and his girlfriend's job was to just run in slow motion yelling "SAAAAAM!". The main group of Decepticons were actually given personalities and unique identities. Though completely under- utilized. They make a big deal of giving them Suicide Squad-like introductions and their screen time amounts to maybe 45 seconds each. I was actually surprised how much screen time Anthony Hopkins had. I figured he'd slum it for two or three scenes, of exposition, grab his paycheck then disappear. But he's actually a prominent character and he seemed to have a lot of fun in the role.

I really don't have much else to say. As stated above, it's the fifth film, you've already made up your mind whether you want to see it or not. If the negative reviews have put you on the fence or dissuaded you, think about whether or not you enjoyed the last four films. If yes, then ignore the critics and enjoy yourself.
120 out of 227 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Twilight (I) (2008)
ugh
10 May 2013
Warning: Spoilers
I finally caved and watched this movie for the first time last night...I'm not a hater, I try to give objective reviews, I'm a male, I'm straight, I love all types of movies including vampire movies. But I'm sorry; this movie was awful. Here's why: - No character development= This is a two-hour film and that's more than enough time for the movie to set up it's characters and make you care about them yet aside from Edward and Bella, everyone else seems like they were only in the movie for four seconds. NOBODY leaves you with the impression that they matter.

  • dry pointless dialogue= it felt like at least 90 minutes of this film were Edward and Bella staring at each other. The only significant dialogue I remember is him saying how he wants to murder her but will fight the urge to do so and somehow that made her fall in love with him. Aside from that it was all "high school stuff" pretty much. Which would be fine if it was interesting in any way.


  • cardboard cutout characters = As I said earlier, none of the characters get any development, Bella shows up on her first day at her new school and basically gets a whole group of best friends. Yes they established she knew some of them from when she was what, 4? But it was just way too convenient and lazy writing that they all meet her and say "Hey wanna hang out? I value your opinion on everything even though we just met." and everyone she bumps into all happen to be in the same clique.


  • terrible acting = Absolutely zero chemistry between Edward and Bella...ironic seeing as how they were dating in real life. I know some of the actors in the movie are actually pretty good so I chalk up a lot of that to the dialogue and directing.


  • incoherent pacing = The three evil vampires, shirtless Channing Tatum stand in, evil chick who was in the movie for 5 seconds and black dread-lock dude. Who go around brutally murdering people. Then black dude shows up at the Cullen's to warn them about Channing Tatum's stand in for no reason at all. Then he just leaves and that's that. So that whole threat lasted about 4 seconds when the Cullens all kill the sh*t out of him. The romance between Edward and Bella...he does all this creepy stuff that literally would cause any woman to file a restraining order makes her fall in love with him, then they play vampire baseball and then bad vampires hiss at them and then disappear.


  • no plot = girl moves to a small town, falls in love with creepy guy, then there's the threat of 3 evil vampires that gets solved in 5 minutes. This could have been a 42 minute after school special.


You could use the excuse that "You should read the book to fully understand everything!". No actually I SHOULDN'T have to read the book to understand a movie. The whole point of film adaptations is to convert the book into a visual narrative that may alter/remove/add things in order to tell the story more cohesively on screen...but to throw a bunch of crap together and say "Well, people should read the book to like the movie better" are just lazy and suck at their jobs.

Yes, it is tailor made for teenage girls. However, it's also saying that teenage girls are stupid and will eat this crap up because it's made for them. You can make something for teenagers and still have it be good. Sadly, they know they don't have to put the effort in because teenage girls DO eat this crap up. It's really a sad testament to society these days.
6 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Aliens: Colonial Marines (2013 Video Game)
A disappointment, sure. But not THAT bad....
17 February 2013
Warning: Spoilers
I recently finished beating the campaign mode. I'll start by reciting what you've probably already heard:

This game has been in production for years. The fans of the franchise were highly anticipating the game's release ever since the 10 minute E3 demo in 2011. It showed impressive graphics, fantastic atmosphere, menacing AI, terrifying Xenomorph enemies...Then on launch date 2013...we found out that demo was a complete and utter LIE! The true game is an incomplete, unpolished mess. Several of the vent shafts near the floor where aliens emerge are simply black squares. There isn't much carnage or cinematic cuts as the demo implied. It's simply an unpolished run n gun, call of duty-esque shooter. It's very glitchy at times and the AI can be outright mentally handicapped. The aliens quite often get stuck behind boxes and sometimes they'll just stroll right by you. Other times your AI marine counterparts will also just stand there while an enemy is 5 feet in front of them and you figure there's no one left to shoot because nobody else is shooting. Then you approach one of your AI buddies and get shot from the enemy that was standing right by them. There are some WTF moments in the game too. {minor spoiler} Right at the beginning of the game you rescue a cocooned comrade. As you and your two fellow marines are crossing a long corridor from one spaceship to another, an alien begins to birth from his chest and so he detonates a grenade which destroys the corridor and almost sucks you and your other marine right into space. A real dick move wouldn't you say? Why not just shoot yourself in the head?

I haven't played the multi-player much but every time I've tried, I've found I'm automatically on the Alien team. I don't know if that's something I select beforehand or if it's just bad luck. The marine's perspective is first person, the alien's is 3rd person and it's very jarring and difficult to get a hold of. I'm used to the AvP games where the Alien, Marine and Predator were all first person. I found it very difficult to kill anyone too. I tried hacking and slashing and every button combo I could try but I always just fell over dead and never really being clear on who killed me.

Alright...so now that the negative stuff is out of the way, I'll talk about the positives: The sound effects- most of the sound effects are taken directly from the Aliens film. The sporadic automatic firing sound of a pulse rifle on the surround sound always sounds awesome. The aliens sound like aliens. The soft, repetitive dut-dut-dut of your motion tracker, and every time it gets a ping, you do feel your hair on the back of your neck stand up. Atmosphere- I know lots of people are saying it's simple or non-existent. But I found as the game progresses it DOES improve. Some of the effects look very close to what was shown in the E3 demo, then other shots right after looks like it's 6 years old. In the later levels when you're out in the open on LV-426 I found myself getting much more enthralled in the game and actually felt entertained. As simple as the game play was, I couldn't help but enjoy the fact that I was in the Aliens universe. The nods- there's tons of nods to the Aliens films and they all worked and brought a smile to my face. Not only that, but they were accurate too! The game opens with a video log from Hicks (voiced by Michael Biehn no less) who is freshly bandaged up. Aboard the Sulaco you find the lower half of an android in the main cargo bay. You also find all the empty cryo tubes and one section that had been ejected...hmm...In Hadley's Hope, there's the two facehuggers shot up in the exact same spots that they were in the film, there was the over-turned bed, etc. etc...There's also another model of Bishop that accompanies your platoon. Voiced by Lance Henriksen too. The Mysteries- Some people are complaining about plot holes. Such as the game takes place 17 weeks after the film (not 17 days for some reason). It gets mentioned that the Sulaco was last seen over Fury 161 yet it had mysteriously re-appeared over LV-426. This never gets directly answered but some of the characters theorize that it had something to do with Weyland-Yutani's cover-up which also plays heavily in the game. I'm fine with the questions not getting answered (such as why Hadley's Hope wasn't completely obliterated when the nuclear explosion went off). It allows one to make up their own interpretation. The weapons- There's a surprising variety of weaponry to choose from (though I'll always be partial to the pulse rifle) there's some customization but I keep my pulse rifle bare bones, the rest of the guns I don't mind customizing but there's nothing spectacular.

So the bottom line; I wound up giving this game a 6 in spite of myself. The action and even the effects seem to pick up as the game goes along. Multiplayer seems thrown together and forgettable. There's great references to an Aliens fan and so on. The glitches and un-polished sections really put a damper on the enjoyment but after a while you learn to focus on other things. If you're an Aliens fan and a gamer, it's worth a play (but rent it or wait till the price drops, which should be fairly quick) definitely not for full price. If you're strictly a gamer and either haven't seen or don't enjoy the aliens films, you'd likely rate this game as a 3 or 4.
4 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Great movie, pity it isn't doing well at the Box Office.
22 January 2013
Let me start by saying this is a straight-up good guys vs. bad guys, shoot 'em up action movie. Would you expect anything less from Ahhnold? I'll say that I was happy to hear Arnold was returning to the big screen for starring roles once his Governorship was over. I've been a die hard Arnold fan since I was 6. Sure he's a senior citizen now...but he's ARNOLD! The trailers for this movie don't really hide anything, it's presented exactly how it is. It's an action movie that doesn't take itself too seriously. The movie does try and have these heartfelt moments which come off more as cheesy than anything else. But I will give the movie props for actually trying to develop its characters to the point they're not just cardboard cut outs. They have personality and emotions so you actually care if they live or die. Which is more than I can say for most movies of this type. Unfortunately the movie seemed to be relying heavily on Arnold's return to the big screen to put butts in the theatre seats. The movie only made $6 million on its opening weekend. Making it the bottom of the barrel at the box office. However I went and saw it on a Tuesday night at 7pm and the theatre was packed. So perhaps word is travelling that it's a fun movie and it'll be able to make some money back. Not that I'm crying for Arnold's bank account but it's a shame when a good movie doesn't do well.
126 out of 193 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Please God make the next one the last one.
25 September 2012
I'll keep this short and sweet.

Don't get me wrong, I actually enjoy ALL the Resident Evil movies. However, less and less effort are going into them. I know lots of people hate Paul W.S. Anderson's work. But the guy actually has the potential to make good movies. Event Horizon and the first Resident Evil were pretty solid in my opinion. But he just seems to be getting lazy. Obviously the movies have pretty much nothing to do with the video games anymore, all they're really doing is trying to be like short video games. They obviously set this movie up for a sequel and I think it should be the one to end the franchise. Until the inevitable reboot that is. That way they can maybe base a movie off the original game, in the mansion with a select few people. I think that'd be a welcome change.
1 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Deep Blue Sea (1999)
Stupid, cheesy, illogical but god help me, it's a guilty pleasure.
8 September 2012
I saw this movie when it came out in theatres when I was 13. I have to say at the time I thought it was the coolest movie ever. Had lots of action, some good humour, gory deaths and SHARKS! I've always wanted a more modern shark movie ever since I saw the first Jaws. Now that I'm 26, I have to say; this movie ain't it.

The original Jaws and to an extent, Jaws 2 have really been the only solid shark movies to ever come out. Deep Blue Sea tries to put a unique spin on the idea of sharks and the concept is interesting enough. We have an aquatic research station in the middle of the ocean where they are holding three genetically altered Mako sharks. This movie puts its characters into an interesting position; their aquatic base is critically damaged and sinking and so they need to get to the surface. This addresses the common issue with shark films; you want to live? stay out of the water. These people had no choice. But this is also where the movie fails on the level of logic. The sharks are able to navigate through the installation as long as an area is half-flooded and they're able to sneak into rooms and wait for people. I won't bother with the rhetorical questions about how they're able to do this. Obviously this is just a dumb popcorn movie. But stuff like that always annoyed me. There's plenty opportunities where these characters HAVE to get into the water so why add scenes where the sharks have to seek them out in areas where the people are still partially dry?

The movie doesn't take itself too seriously, the CGI is rather poor even by '99 standards. But overall the performances are pretty good by the cast who at the time were generally unknowns. So if you decide to watch it, know what you're getting into and just shut your brain off and enjoy.
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Total Recall (I) (2012)
A decent sci-fi action flick but nothing spectacular.
4 August 2012
Warning: Spoilers
You know you're starting to feel old when they're remaking Arnold Schwarzenegger films. Though to be fair, this isn't so much of a remake as it is another version of the same story. There are a few nods to the 1990 film, but over-all they are quite different. This film is slightly more grounded in a possible future whereas the 1990 film went quite over-the-top throughout.

The cast of this film do a pretty decent job, Colin Ferrell is a good choice for someone who can play an every day working stiff but who could also be a secret agent as opposed to Arnold who is supposed to be an average Joe but is built like a tree trunk. As for the movie itself, the special effects are fantastic, the action scenes are well done, however the film never seizes the opportunity to do anything unique. They go with the classic action movie cliché where a ton of bad guys shoot at the good guys as they run away yet nobody can hit the broad side of a barn. The movie takes place entirely on Earth where chemical warfare has devastated the earth with the exception of Great Britain and Australia. The 1990 film started off on Earth then went to Mars. At the end of the 1990 film, Quaid starts an atmosphere processor which creates breathable air on Mars. Something this film could have utilized with the whole chemical warfare ravaged the planet, there was secretly a machine that could purify the air making the planet habitable again...but instead Cohaagen just wanted to kill everybody for some reason which, unless I missed it was never made clear.

This film also downplays the possibility of the film being a dream much more than the 1990 film as well. In Arnold's film, they throw in a lot of hints that could very well lead us to believe it was a dream but not enough to make it obvious. Leaving it open to interpretation. In this film, there are a few scenes where they try and suggest this, but it seemed very half-hearted almost as if the director wanted the scenes, but he chose to interpret the script as it all being real.

Overall, a decent action movie, with great eye candy (Colin Ferrell for the ladies and Kate Beckinsale and Jessica Biel duking it out for the guys) but with a script that could have been much stronger. I think if we had the 1990 script with this film's cast, crew and technology we'd have a winner.
3 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Now I know why Christopher Nolan wanted to end the series...there's no way he could top this.
27 July 2012
When the Dark Knight came out, I knew it was highly anticipated. However, I was surprised at just how successful it was. 8.9 on IMDb, smashing box office records, etc. I had very high expectations for it and it definitely met them. However, I admit I was very excited and my friends and I discussed the possibilities the movie could have and over- thought it to death. So when I finally saw the film, I couldn't help but feel slightly disappointed that some of my ideas didn't come to fruition. But that was my own fault for letting my expectations get undoubtedly high. The more times I watched the film, the more I enjoyed it. I did not think Christopher Nolan could top that.

When The Dark Knight Rises was finally put into production, I vowed to myself that I would not let my expectations get too high and that I wouldn't over-think the film again. Of course, I wound up doing that anyways. I was bursting at the seams for this film and did this film meet my expectations? No, it blew my expectations away completely. Anyone who saw the film and I asked what they thought; "wow" is all that came to their mind. I respond to the question "Well, I don't want to over-sell it. But it was one of the greatest movies I've ever seen." The acting is superb, better than the first two combined and they were both top-notch as well. (Seeing as how Heath Ledger won the Oscar for The Joker) the fact that the movie is promoted as the conclusion of a trilogy gives everything a very, shall we say "Mortal" feeling. Any beloved characters have the possibility of dying, as they need not be concerned with bringing them back for a sequel. Which gives the film a much more suspenseful feel. The film strikes a very human and emotional chord with not only Bruce Wayne and Alfred, but with all the characters including the villains. They are all humanized, all their motives are made clear. The film takes you to a very low emotional point, the most grim out of the three films (which is odd, it's usually second in a trilogy) to the point where it doesn't seem possible to come out of this dark place. However, the movie "rises" up from the misery and leads to a perfectly executed, beautiful and satisfying conclusion. Well done to Christopher Nolan, and all the cast. My two biggest regrets are that there won't be a sequel and there won't be a superhero movie done this well ever again. But I'd rather have a fantastic trilogy than have the series turn to crap as the previous franchise did.

P.S. Both Tom Hardy and Michael Caine deserve Oscars for their performances, but being the pretentious load of BS that is the Oscars, I doubt either of them will get nominated. I believe Heath Ledger, while completely deserving of winning the Oscar, only was because he passed away after the film was made. If either Hardy or Caine are nominated, then there may be hope for the Oscars. Even more so if one of them wins.
5 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Good, but showing too much creature and characters that lack common sense keep it from being great.
4 June 2012
As my headline suggests, this movie is by no means a bad movie. The actors do a good job, the story is interesting and the atmosphere is downright creepy. However, the mysterious small creatures that lurk in the shadows are revealed in the film far too early. Once you see them, creepy as they are, they become very un-scary quickly which makes you say things like "stomp on them!" etc. which kind of takes away from the dread aspect of the movie. If you never quite see the creatures, it'd be harder to discern a way to defeat them. However, Sally manages to crush one at the end of the second act which suggests they aren't all that formidable. Also having scenes where characters just do things that any sane person would be doing the opposite is a staple of the horror genre, so many of the situations in the film border on cliché. I understand that horror films can't have every character doing the "smart" thing, if they did there'd be no movie. However, there's also ways where they try and figure out what's happening which continually get foiled until the third act when all hell breaks loose. But having the young child who is terrorized and having all the adults not believe her has been done to death.

Overall, a good movie with some genuinely creepy moments. But once the movie picks up pace it becomes more like an action adventure than a horror.
0 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Community (2009–2015)
NBC...you're notorious for cancelling fantastic shows. Please change!
8 April 2012
I only recently was introduced to Community. A friend of mine loaned me the entire first season. I had heard the show mentioned before, but never really enough to pique my interest. One rather dull Saturday afternoon I decided to start watching it. Within 15 minutes of the first episode I knew I'd love this show. I couldn't stop watching it. I finished the whole first season within a day or two and immediately sought out the second. The third season is part-way through airing now and I recently heard news that the show is on the brink of being cancelled. There's been tons of lobbying and support for the show to stay on the air, and it recently got a big ratings bump. I can only hope this continues because this is by far my favourite sitcom. I love every aspect of it. NBC and FOX are both notorious for cancelling shows that are beloved because they don't garner results on the incredibly out-dated and extremely flawed Nielsen ratings system. They don't take into account people that download torrents of the show or stream it online either. So I beg you NBC, keep this show going! I also urge all American networks to band together and devise a new ratings system because Nielsen is a bunch of crap!
5 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Top Shot (2010–2013)
Part reality show, Part game show
31 March 2012
I would like to start by saying I hate reality shows. I can't stand the premise of them and the politics involved. When I heard about this show, it honestly didn't pique my interest but the thought of having a game show style series with guns at least made it interesting enough to check out. I am a strong supporter of firearms and the fact that a television show was out there that portrayed guns in a positive and safe manor was a good thing in my opinion. I started the show during the first season and the first two episodes were a little weak, but after that it started picking up momentum. The show doesn't have too many reality show elements except for the losing team voting two members to an elimination challenge. The difference from most reality shows that I've seen being that instead of the person who garnered the most votes just packing their bags and leaving, two of them get voted in and face off in an elimination challenge. So even if someone got more votes than someone else, it doesn't mean they're going home. They have a chance to fight their way back to the game.

There's some side interviews with the contestants and a little bit of footage of them mingling around they house they have to stay in. So you get to know the competitors and which ones to like and which ones you wish get sent home. But about 80% of the show is training and challenges. There's been some drama that's very annoying in each season, but it's significantly less as each season has progressed (season 4 is currently airing as I write this) So if you like reality shows, you'll like this one. If you don't like reality shows, you still might like this one. If you love guns, then you will probably find satisfaction in how the show portrays weapons.
10 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Never knew a Mission Impossible movie or John Woo movie could be this boring.
2 March 2012
I never got a chance to see this movie at the theatre, but when it came out on video I was very pumped for it. I really enjoyed the first mission impossible and this film, with it's awesome sound track, (limp bizkit being one of my favourite bands AND doing the theme song.) and all the promotions for it seemed like it was going to kick ass. Also I'm a fan of John Woo's American movies such as Face/Off, Replacement Killers and Broken Arrow (Haven't seen his Hong Kong flicks) all signs pointed to this movie being non-stop action with some good humour thrown in the mix.

What I got was a very long, dragged out, dry, humourless, predictable movie with literally zero action until the end of the film. Not to mention, Limp Bizkit's theme wasn't even used for more than 12 seconds! John Woo is famous for using slow motion, it's one of his trademarks. Which is fine for action sequences and so on. But Woo uses slow-motion in practically every scene. So this two hour movie is really only about an hour and a half, but dragged out because so much was done in slow motion. There was a scene where Thandie Newton's character approaches Dougray Scott's character. I swear to god the scene is 5 minutes long simply slow motion of them staring at each other. Also, the dialogue is so lacking that there's virtually no character development on anyone.

All around a disappointment. As I write this review I'm re-watching the movie on blu-ray for the first time and my opinion hasn't changed. 5 out of 10 because it did lead to M:I3 and M:IGP
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Thing (I) (2011)
Perfect? No. A fun sci-fi flick? Absolutely. Acknowledges the '82 film? Definitely.
15 October 2011
I admit I was as sceptical as anyone when I heard this would be a prequel the John Carpenter's 1982 classic of the same name. That being said, I was over-joyed that it wasn't going to be a *remake* because to do so would be insulting. Then I have to admit I became optimistic when I read that the filmmakers refused to do a remake as the '82 film was perfect. So it sounds like a movie was finally getting made by fans of the original. But just remembering how other Prequels completely ignored or just royally screwed up the continuities of the previous entries in a franchise, X-Men: First Class and Wolverine both acted almost like the first 3 films didn't happen. The Star Wars prequel trilogy is probably the closest to acknowledging the original trilogy. But even still, there are continuity errors. Underworld: Rise Of The Lycans...and so on and so on. None of these are necessarily BAD films, personally I enjoy all of them as standalone movies. But I find it difficult to get in to them very much when there's a blatant disregard for the previous films.

So here we have The Thing, 2011. I won't get into details about the movie, as I'm sure you're familiar with the premise by now. It chronicles the events of the Norwegian camp that two characters visit in the '82 film. This is one film where the crew took great care to respect the '82 film and not contradict it. Are there still continuity errors? Of course! Are they so offencive to the eyes that you can't stand watching this movie because they don't jive with the original? No! Well, I'm sure some self-proclaimed "Super-Fans" of John Carpenter's film may find that to be the case. But in terms of continuity for a prequel? This is probably the best at acknowledging its predecessor than any other film.

As for the film itself? I must say it's pretty enjoyable. Keeping in mind that it's NOT John Carpenter's The Thing and is about a RECENTLY THAWED creature, who in my opinion doesn't quite know how to deal with humans right out of the ice block. Which gives this film the opportunity to inject a bit more action into it than the 82. It gives this film a different tone, but once again, they weren't trying to remake JC's movie. Though there are some blatant homages. But once again, the other film is 30 years old. There's a fair chunk of the audience who wouldn't have seen it. So some nods to it don't phase me one bit. There are too many characters in this movie. So the movie suffers in that regard because they needed a set amount of them anyway (for continuity purposes). The movie tries to give each character at least something to do. But unfortunately, when you spread this out over a 100 minute movie, it also takes away from some of the main characters. This makes it harder to connect with any of them so you don't feel as bad when they start dying. I think this movie could have benefited from an extra 15-20 minutes more running time. Simply for dialogue and character development. It seemed like no time at all from finding the creature, to it thawing, to all hell breaking loose.

Bottom line, it's a fun popcorn movie. Is it as good as John Carpenter's '82 film? No. Is it a worthy companion piece to it? Yes. It could have been much much worse in every regard. So it gets a 9 out of 10 from me if for no other reason than it did a good job, albeit not a perfect job of connecting with the original.
5 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Conan (2010–2021)
Conan the Resurrected.
11 October 2011
I have been a huge Conan fan going on ten years now. Ever since I was in high school and I started watching Late Night. He pretty much had me in stitches every night. The only time I'd check out the competition was if Conan was a repeat, yet I never felt the others really matched up to him.

When Leno announced that he would be giving the Tonight Show to Conan to avoid any confusion as to who was going to succeed Leno, I had a lot of respect for him doing that. (and I could never stand Leno) So then Conan gets the Tonight show and Leno precedes him with a poorly thought out prime time show. We all know what happened next so I won't bore you with the details. I like most people, completely sided with Conan and felt awful that my favourite TV personality was getting a raw deal.

But now Conan is back and it has been close to a year since his new show started airing. I have to admit the first two weeks seemed a bit shaky. Almost like all that was going through Conan's mind was "I don't feel like I should be back on the air. What's going to happen this time?" and I'd say a good chunk of the monologue jokes for the first two weeks were taking jabs at NBC and so on. It was expected of course but it got very tedious and sounded much more like bitterness and complaining and by the end of the first week I was getting sick of hearing it. I kept watching however, remaining hopeful and sure enough, once they got over the initial jitters things started improving greatly, Conan seemed comfortable in his new digs and was back to his old self, almost with a new found confidence that he doesn't have to worry about pleasing anybody but without the arrogance that would lead to laziness. Andy is also much funnier too. I have to admit that I didn't really like him on The Tonight Show (I started watching Conan after Andy had been gone for a while) so my only impressions of him were from Tonight Show and he wasn't really allowed to do much except pipe in with a stupid joke from his podium. Just seemed forced and annoying. Yet now that he's back to his co-hosting duties, I can see why Conan and him are best friends. They have great chemistry and Andy is just as funny as Conan.

While it sucks that Conan had to get screwed over, and that the two-faced, giant-jawed Leno is still allowed to keep the Tonight Show; I must say I like Conan's new show much better than the Tonight Show. While Conan vowed he would not change his style of gags and skits on Tonight show, it was clear he was forced to tone it down and now on TBS Conan seems to have free reign to do the show how he wants and I will continue to watch!
40 out of 49 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Insidious (I) (2010)
Hands down one of the best horror films in a long time.
6 October 2011
Warning: Spoilers
{Spoiler at very bottom, will be labelled as such}

It takes quite a bit for me to actually consider a movie scary, or even creepy. Very few horror movies I consider truly scary. The only movies that I can think of off the top of my head that I actually found frightening were Event Horizon (keep in mind I was 11 when I saw it). The Exorcism of Emily Rose, and The Ring. Anything else I found to be boring, a rip off of something else, or at very least an entertaining film but not scary. The main problem is that most modern horror movies feel that they have to have something scary happen in pretty much EVERY scene. It gets so tedious and takes no time to build up tension. Then of course there's films like the Saw series who think gore is scary. It's not scary, it's disgusting and uninteresting.

Then along came Insidious. I chose to skip seeing it in the theatre when I heard that James Wan (director of the first Saw) was helming the project. (that being said I did think Dead Silence another one of his movies was pretty creepy) But I decided I hadn't seen any ghost movies in a while and the worst thing that could happen was that I would get a laugh out of it. So I picked the movie up on blu-ray cheap and watched it that night. Boy was I glad I did. This film did everything right. Went against pretty much every cliché (I know writer Leigh Wannell said he had a list of horror clichés so he could avoid using them). The pacing, atmosphere, timing of scares was all perfect. Also there was a significant amount of showing us lots of stuff, but not really SHOWING us which I thought worked amazing.

My only issue was...SPOILER BELOW:

The need for a downer, open-ended finale. I'm okay with ambiguous endings but when a family has more or less literally gone through hell, I'm okay with a happy ending. But that's me.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Rescue Me (2004–2011)
My 2004-2011 review.
8 September 2011
Warning: Spoilers
It's hard to believe this show has come to its end. I have watched it since the first episode aired in 2004. It's almost surreal that it won't be airing anymore. To think the show started when I was 18 and ended when I was 25. That's no small chunk of my life. I think this is the first show I've actually watched from first to last episode from original airing time. (not including shows that were cancelled prematurely) most shows I either start later in the series (so I know it has momentum) or wait till the entire series is done then watch the DVD's.

Rescue Me always held a special place for me, for reasons I mentioned, but I always liked all of the characters. No character was perfect, all were funny, had great stories. I cared about them, even the later additions to the show. I didn't want any of them to die throughout the series, but I had often said that there were a few characters I wouldn't have a problem with leaving the show. But much to my surprise, the core cast stuck with the show through the entire run. With a few exceptions of course. The show was funny, thought provoking, and at times tear-jerking. Often, all within a matter of minutes of each other.

By the time season 3 had finished airing, I felt the show was only getting better. Then season 4 started airing...and my feelings were right. The first two episodes were great. But then something happened (spoilers after this) at the end of Season 4, Episode 2. The Chief of the house, Jerry Reilly, a man who was a central character committed suicide. While I was upset about this, I always was excited to see how that would propel all the other characters' stories. I was sad to see that it didn't propel them at all. There was a five minute focus on Jerry's death, and then all the characters were more or less over it. From then on, something just seemed off about the show. I was still enjoying it, but I wasn't feeling the dire need to catch every episode. I still did, out of loyalty and the moderate entertainment the show provided for the res of season 4 and all of season 5. Then season 6 aired...it was awful in my opinion. It was getting to the point where many of the characters outside the firehouse were so over-used, and many of them could have been written out or killed off by season 3's end. Yet they kept coming back and the stories started going nowhere. Tommy Gavin was the only person getting stories, all of the other characters would just come and go if there was a scene with Tommy. It was to the point I wasn't even going to tune in for season 7. But season 7 was the final season, I figured I'd tough it out till the end.

Season 7 started off much like season 6 (they were filmed as one season but split into 2) the first two episodes were the worst yet. I was so disappointed I decided I'd only give the show one more episode. Thank God I did, because that episode was the best in a long time, and the show continued to have good, to great episodes right till the finale.

Now for the finale; it starts off with a switcharoo. The second-last episode ends with a huge explosion in which all the characters were trapped inside a building. The show opens with Lou being the only survivor (which was deeply upsetting. Though Lou and Garrity were my favourite characters, to kill off the entire crew was just a middle finger to the audience) but then Tommy wakes to find that was a dream. I let a sigh of relief go, but then we find out that Lou had died and the rest of them had made it out with a few bumps and bruises. The final episode does not deal with anger and frustration of Tommy losing his best friend and the crew their Lieutenant. Instead it brings the crew and Tommy's family closer together and they let go of their angst. I won't go into more detail as I'm still absorbing the final episode. But I will say, even though there was a death of one of my two favourite characters. The show had a surprisingly happy ending.
4 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Fighting (2009)
Should have been called "Talking"
16 July 2011
I can only conclude that the script for this film was only 3 pages long and basically consisted of phrases like "This guy tries to convince this other guy to fight" "this guy decides to fight" "They fight." all the dialogue had to be improvised by the actors and either they weren't good at improvising or the director wasn't paying attention so they just kept talking and talking and talking and they had to edit together the most coherent dialogue possible. There are only 3 or 4 fights in the film. The first fight lasts a total of I believe 30 seconds before the opponent travels head-first into a water fountain. The second fight gets broken up before it even starts, the third fight (if there was one) I don't even remember. The last fight was the only one that was moderately decent.

Been a while since I watched this movie so I can't elaborate too much, but forgettable fights, characters you don't care about, awful dialogue. I'd say avoid this one unless you enjoy being bored.
4 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Knowing (2009)
I owe Nicolas Cage an apology...sort of.
5 June 2011
I saw the trailers for this movie and I thought it looked intriguing...until I saw Nicolas Cage was in it. Then it automatically looked like it was going to suck.

Now I'm not a pure hater, I used to really like him back in the late 90's...The Rock, Con Air, etc. But around the time Windtalkers came out...I found him to just really project this ego of "I'm the greatest actor I don't even need to act." which continued for every film he was in that I could bear to watch after that. It got to the point where just seeing his face in a movie got to be enough to kill my interest in seeing that movie. I saw this movie for cheap at the video store so I decided to pick it up. I figured what the hell, should at least have some good special effects.

Boy am I disappointed I didn't see this at the theatre. It was excellent, there were quite a few layers to the movie, all around solid performances by the cast (Yes that includes Mr. Cage) great visuals, compelling characters, suspense, drama, emotion, dread, the list goes on. I was most impressed with the film being based on the Ancient Astronaut Theory of which I am fascinated by. And the film does it in a subtle but not "this is fact" kind of way.

So I definitely recommend this film to anyone, even if you don't like Nick Cage, it's worth a look.
5 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Back to basics and a smart choice. Could it be studios are wising up?
28 May 2011
I will say that I am a fan of all the PotC movies, the second one is probably my favourite...but my reasons for liking sequels to action films or comic book movies is usually that while the first one is usually the best, it sets up the characters, they all meet, develop relationships, etc. so the second film leaves more room for action and advancing stories. Which is the case for PotC. The first one is definitely the best executed, but I enjoyed the second one for its action, effects, humour, etc. My complaints about Pirates 2 and 3 were that they became so complex and ridiculous that they were just wayyyy out there. I had no trouble following the plot but I couldn't help but think that younger audience members wouldn't know what the hell was going on at all. Also, in the first film we're not entirely sure if Jack Sparrow is trying to screw people over to secure his own gains, or if he's helping himself by helping others. It's clearly stated by the end of the film that he's actually a good man. Yet in Pirates 2 and 3 he's blatantly trying to screw people over who had helped save him previously.

So when I heard that a fourth pirates movie was in production, I wasn't thrilled. My main thought was "Whatever, we'll see." Once it was released I decided to go see it at the theatre and I was pleasantly surprised. The plot was straightforward, they're trying to find the fountain of youth and they list the steps needed to complete this. Jack is back to being the honestly dishonest (honestly) pirate we all came to love. There are mermaids, zombies (sort of) and of course the fountain of youth. But the plot never gets too complicated or completely ridiculous. My complaint about the film was the main villain Blackbeard wasn't fleshed out enough. He shows up fairly late into the film and he's never really shown to be the scariest pirate to sail the sea. Davy Jones and his crew were much more menacing.

All in all, if the series continues with this pattern of keeping the movies simple and fun then I'm all for more of them being made.
6 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Scream 4 (2011)
I'm not going to rate this movie, as I'm still mixed on my feelings towards it.
16 April 2011
Warning: Spoilers
The original Scream raised the bar for the slasher genre. It took jabs at the idea of horror films in general and added technology in the mix. Each new instalment tried to raise the bar, but wound up becoming more comedic. As if each sequel was spoofing the previous entry. This film was no exception.

I loved the way this film started. With a double-spoof on the series. Which kind of set the tone for the rest of the film. The idea that this killer doesn't follow the rules, making him/her/it unpredictable. But the film still winds up being predictable. So much so I actually found the revealing of the killers to be a bit of a middle finger to the fans. If the entire film was meant to be an ironic joke to the previous entries, then job well done. It was definitely funny, intentionally. It pokes fun at the idea of all the prequel/sequel/reboots that are out in Hollywood today. It's obviously a direct sequel to Scream 3, as Dewey, Gail and Sydney all return. But the film has equal focus on Emma Roberts' character Jill and her best friend Riley played by Hayden Panettiere. Which of course leaves us all to wonder if that means Wes Craven is going to give us a Cotton Weary for our 3 former main characters. Which gives the series that "remake" kind of edge. But when films are re-started so close to the previous series' last instalment (less than 25 years In my opinion) it's called a "re-boot" So I wasn't going to be surprised if Dewey, Gail and Sydney were all killed off in this film, leading the way for the next generation of survivors. Which I wouldn't mind seeing fresh faces survive, but I didn't want to see our 3 heroes die. Also, the killers' reveal was so idiotic it really took me out of the last 20 minutes of the movie...I'm conflicted if I should just say who the killer(s) is/are and let you decide if you still want to see the movie or not. I think i'll just say that don't be too surprised that it's completely illogical.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Mafia II (2010 Video Game)
I hate to say it but; It's disappointing in every way.
19 January 2011
Warning: Spoilers
The original Mafia game released in 2002 is one of my all time favourite games. To this day I will still play it once and a while. Because it is a continuous story and not exactly Free Roam, it feels almost like watching a movie while playing the game. The original game, had excellent characters that you cared about, great action scenes, interesting missions, classic cars from the 30's that were a lot of fun to drive, superb physics for its time; you could riddle a car with bullets and it would be completely covered with bullet holes, smash windows, shoot out tires, break the fuel line and run out of gas in the car, shoot from the driver's seat (which was the first game you could do that to my recollection), the list goes on...the only thing that upset me was the final cut-scene of the game has your character gunned down on his front lawn by two hit men. So in the end your character dies tragically. But of course he paid the price for his actions.

Now for Mafia II...starts off during WWII, then a fair chunk of the game takes place in 1945 when you return from the war, then get sent to prison, then jump to 1951. You get out of prison and get right back into the life of crime. You start off as a low-level thug, doing petty jobs...which continues for a very large chunk of the game, until you become a made man. Then, almost immediately after you become made, you start doing things that are forbidden in the Mafia (at the time.) it is clearly stated by one of the bosses that you don't deal in drugs. Yet you do it anyways and through a course of action, create a major sh#tstorm between the Chinese and your mob faction. Then you're basically targeted for death, but you're offered a chance to save yourself by murdering your boss. Your character just shrugs and says okay. All of the characters in this game are under-developed. The missions play so fast, and NONE stand out as being unique. All verrry generic. The story is lacking, other than Vito and Joe, all the characters seem to come and go without getting much "screen time" so you don't get to care about any of them. Vito (your character) is just a douchebag. I didn't like him at all when watching the story and Joe could be funny, but he was also obnoxious, so I didn't warm to him either. As for the ending of the game? Well there isn't one. It just stops in the middle of a cut-scene, more or less like the end of The Sopranos. I assume they're releasing some add-on content to continue the story. The problem is, I wasn't interested enough to fork over any extra cash towards this game. If they continue the story with Mafia III, they better make some significant improvements...oh and I forgot to mention, there's also a mission which simply has you driving to a guy's house and activating a cut-scene...that cut-scene is the ending to the original game, which has you killing your character from the original game. So now, your current character just murdered a character I actually warmed to. But there's nothing else to the mission except escaping cops, which requires you to drive about a block before you lose them.
2 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
$125,000,000 that could have gone to curing cancer.
16 January 2011
I was about 10 or 11 when this film came out, and when I was younger Batman Forever was my favourite of the series (now that I'm older, the Burton ones are my favourite. Not comparing to the Nolan films) So I was really excited for this film. I was always a huge Arnold Schwarzenegger fan too, so to hear he was playing Mr. Freeze (one of my favourite villains) Everything was looking as if it was going to be the best yet. Boy was I wrong, I still remember being in the theatre wincing at how bad it all was. I re-watched the movie just the other day and not only is it worse than I remember, but I had completely forgotten just how bad the sets and special effects were. It was 1997! The movie had a budget of $125,000,000. 25 of which was Arnold's salary, but still. Where did the other $100,000,000 go? The special effects looked like claymation, the set designs all looked like they were borrowed from power rangers. Did Schumacher simply spend $1,000,000 making the movie and pocket the other 99?
1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
It's definitely better than it's getting credit for. But still could have been better.
24 November 2010
I've noticed that most of the reviews panning this movie seem to be more about complaining about the 3D effects. News flash people; the greedy studio heads decided to convert this movie to 3D at the last possible minute. Therefore the 3D effects look like crap because not only was it rushed, but it wasn't filmed in 3D!!! So if it was that bad why the hell would you sit through the entire movie then write a review on how bad the movie was? Go get your money back and watch it in 2D! As for the movie itself; I had only seen the original about a week before seeing the remake. While I enjoyed some elements of the original, I thought it was lacking in terms of pace. This film, definitely improves on the pace, and you get to care a bit more the rest of the soldiers that followed Perseus into the underworld. My main complaint is that they added a new female character to the plot, and as much as I enjoy seeing Gemma Aterton, it pushed away focus from Andromeda. Who really was crucial to the plot. So here we are caring for Io, and not really seeing enough of Andromeda to really be concerned for her. Yet the whole plot is about saving her more or less.

Bottom line, great action/adventure movie. Doesn't really follow Greek mythology so don't let that shock you. Could have used a bit more character development but most action movies could. I give it 8/10.
2 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An error has occured. Please try again.

Recently Viewed