Reviews

9 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
7/10
Good film- superb acting all around, but I wish it had a slightly different angle
13 April 2008
Harrison Ford is brilliant in this film, as is the rest of the cast, and I am a big fan of this sort of film that explores the human psyche. I, however, wish the film spent just as much time showing the Missionaries evils and maniacal religious B.S. as it did painting Ford's character as a dangerous megalomaniac. I disagree with many of Ford's characters decisions over the course of the film...and in the long run he ends up becoming exactly what he set out to destroy, but his ideas on America are SPOT ON (and are just as relevant today) and it goes without saying that his errors are paled in comparison to what Christian missionaries have done through the brainwashing of the 3rd world people. My point is that Ford's character's plans were ill-conceived and nutty, but the world he left was just as insane.
30 out of 49 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Calling this an insult to the "Alien" legacy is an understatement
25 December 2007
These two talentless hacks essentially took two of the greatest movie monsters in history- one of them from two Oscar winning films and the other from an excellent action film- and put them in a terrible 1980s Friday the 13th movie, atrocious acting and all. If the acting were merely serviceable, I could have enjoyed the film to some extent. Unfortunately, the acting in the film is so terrible you have a hard time even looking at the screen without wincing....it's almost as if they took people off the street who had never even read the script (as moronic it may be.) To take a quote from Futurama "I have seen better acting from extras in Godzilla movies!" and that is a perfectly fitting description for this movie. The acting is so terrible it feels as though the entire film is going to collapse on itself but, alas, the torture lasts 86 minutes. If that weren't enough, the story is about as inventive as a 3rd rate Sci-Fi channel movie and the films much praised gore factor is surprisingly low (FAR less than the far superior Alien Resurrection.) The directing is horrific, the situations end up spoofing themselves unintentionally. The only positive aspect about the film are a few of the predator scenes and the final fight scene between the Predator and the Predalien, which is intense but fleeting. I feel like I have just been raped. I hated the first AVP and, although the creatures in this film look better and the violence is better, the acting and directing was far superior in that film....and that's not saying a lot.
27 out of 58 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Hilarious, clever film.....ruined by terrible sequels
2 May 2005
Like almost all decent horror comedies, this film was ruined by lame and watered down sequels. This original, however, was a blast. The sharp wit and clever satire hit the mark consistently, plus the soundtrack can be pretty rock in' (The Cramps anyone?). This was a rare horror gem, in a decade where horror had been reduced to garbage like Friday The 13th and Nightmare On Elm Street. Not to mention it managed to beat even the father of zombie films (George Romero) at the box office that year. I've recently heard that they are putting out 2 more sequels, what a drag, do these filmmakers have no shame? Some things are better left alone.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Titanic (1997)
3/10
Tepid and generic
2 May 2005
OK, this is easily the most overrated film in history. Beyond the fancy CGI and epic scale is a generic love story, with poor charisma between the lead characters. Now, I'm not gonna Leonardo bash, he's actually a great actor and it's a shame this shitty movie put him in lame "teen heartthrob" status....cause he's got talent (just watch "What's Eating Gilbert Grape"). But this film is typical James Cameron, as in it takes no risks and plays out with little to no surprises. I'm not saying he's a bad filmmaker, his kind of directing can have great results (Aliens, The Abyss, The Terminator) and not so great results (this film). I think he's better suited for action films than serious dramas, since he was basically the only person that could make a decent film starring the ridiculous "Ahnuld".
6 out of 14 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Sin City (2005)
8/10
Cool Movie
4 April 2005
Great action, killer FX, an amazingly gritty vibe, BEAUTIFUL barely clothed and powerful women......it's like a graphic novel (or comic) come to life, best it's ever been done. I would've enjoyed more character development and I can't stand Bruce Willis as a person....but overall this movie was definitely a riot to watch. It's very violent, I wish I could've seen some of the gore a little clearer (Tom Savini style) but nonetheless those with a serious blood lust will be quenched by this film.....nowhere since in "Day Of The Dead" have I seen so much brutal gore. Benicio Del Toro is excellent, there's something about what he can do with his eyes....it can send shivers down your spine. Mickey Rourke was surprisingly effective as well. Definitely not for the squeamish or closed minded, but what decent film is?
0 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Skrew Hollywood Grub Grabbers
4 April 2005
This film is utter shite, Paul Anderson knows nothing of character development, plot, etc. he just knows how to direct a cheesy FX ridden turkey.....just look at almost all of his films- total garbage. This film probably should have never been made, at least in live-action it shouldn't. It just can't work, neither of them is scary anymore and even worse this film lacks what could've been it's ONLY minor saving grace (you know, keeping me from walking out of the theater)- relentless violence and gore. It's nothing more than a sterile, Disney-style version of an even far superior comic book series. Both franchises are dead, and neither should be resurrected (no, not even by Ridley Scott). Just like 50-something rockers shouldn't reform and tarnish a great bands legacy. Let's stop the raping. I, for one, thought Freddy VS Jason worked, for one reason- the films it was based on SUCKED, therefore it seemed to as more of a potent satire and spoof than a serious film. These Alien and Predator films however, did not deserve this tragedy.
1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Die Hard (1988)
5/10
More Macho, Amerikan B.S.
4 April 2005
I'll admit, the film is entertaining at times, and up until the age of 15 (when I started to grow an adult brain), I loved this movie. But now I look at it and just see another product on Reagan-era patriotic exploitation. Just like every "Ahnuld" film, "Sly" film, etc. The only real difference here is that some of the acting is very good, and the antagonist (can't believe his name alludes me at the moment) is brilliantly fiendish. Bruce Willis, on the other hand, is just another tough guy bonehead, only he doesn't have the physical condition to be one. A slightly new type of action movie for it's time, but nowadays just an average "seemingly invincible man defeats terrorists" type shite.
8 out of 31 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
28 Days Later (2002)
10/10
Great, modern classic
4 April 2005
A complete first (successfully at least) for a "zombie"(these guys aren't dead though) movie- it's serious and it works incredibly well. The acting is fantastic, the camera work is menacing as hell and the the core theme is razor-sharp in delivery. Danny Boyle is a genius, he can go from making one of the best comedy/dramas ever (Trainspotting), to making the best ultra-serious Zombie film ever, and recently made a family film called millions which I hear is fantastic. This films final chapter is mind blowing, especially the scene in which Jim (possibly infected in the mind of Selena) savagely crushes that marine guy's skull. The music in that scene, coupled with the camera work and acting= one of the greatest moments in modern horror film history in my opinion.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Better than expected, Best they could've done, but loses steam after multiple viewings
4 April 2005
I've watched this film about 3 times with friends since it's release.....and it seemed to lose any real tension or entertainment value (not completely, but moderately). Where as the original, on the other hand, I have seen at least 30 times and I love it every time. It's seems movies with underlying, yet obvious, motives are far more entertaining than straight action. This is also true of the brilliant 28 Days Later, although in a different, less humorous way. This by no means implies that I don't enjoy or like the film, it just doesn't hold a candle to the original. But then again, no one expected it to, it's probably the best remake in a long time, since it went for something different.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed