Change Your Image
Jipper2
Reviews
Peelers (2016)
Successful Mix of Comedy, Kill Scenes & Over the Top Fun
On the final night this strip club's open, the owner gets more than she bargained for. Infected patrons come in for more than naked women, nasty beer and bear which is served on the menu. Besides bear, Peelers serves up a healthy mix of boobs, blood and hilarity. At first glance Peelers seems like another cheap thrills, boob filled, horror film. While all of those things are true, it also successfully pulls off comedy in between it's many kill scenes. Something most movies fail at doing.
With a set-up similar to From Dusk Till Dawn once they get to the bar. The overall pace of the movie is closer to Feast. The comedy is definitely crude and immature and won't be for everyone. If you like John Gulager movies and you're ready for some fun, Peelers packs a lot of enjoyment.
Peelers suffers from the traditional low budget horror condition of bad acting, corny dialogue and a weak premise. Horror fans should expect this from any low budget horror film going in. Where Peelers succeeds is they don't take themselves too seriously.
After a couple of hilarious stripper dance scenes, I was waiting to see what they did with the pregnant stripper. If I have any issue with this cheap thrill ride, it's that I didn't get to see the comedy, that scene would've provided. Opportunity wasted and all for a Winnie the Pooh scene. They lacked contact during their kill scenes as well. They could have used a Tom Savini helping them out but at least they didn't go with enough animated effects for it to ruin anything.
Red Dawn (2012)
As Expected, Lacking in Depth and Human Realism
I loved the original Red Dawn. It wasn't the greatest movie ever made but it was a great action movie. The plot for this movie has so much potential that can be lived up to. The original did a good job but there was certainly room for improvements.
When I first heard about the remake coming, I was initially excited. When I began to hear about the casting, I lost a lot of luster for this film. Chris Hemsworth isn't the worst pretty-boy actor out there but he's by no means a good actor. He's definitely an, "in the moment" pretty boy that will probably pass. Josh Hutcherson is just a flat out bad actor. The kid lacks emotion. Or at least the right emotion for the right scene. Josh Peck has actually turned out to be a good actor but the fat kid from Josh and Drake just isn't the right casting for a young Charlie Sheen's replacement.
So when the trailers for the movie came out my worst fears appeared to be confirmed. The movie appeared to be action'd up, CGI'd up, glazed over depth and more of a paycheck movie than something someone in the making process actually felt inspired by. I didn't watch the remake I was once excited to see in theaters. After bad reviews I didn't even rent it on BluRay when it came out. Instead, I decided not to watch it. Eventually when TV watching was hard up and it was free I watched the movie. My worst fears were confirmed but it wasn't as bad as I thought it'd be.
The best way to describe this movie is with an analogy. The "bad guys" parachuting into the town would have been a powerful emotional scene if the bad CGI hadn't taken me out of it. Everything in this movie was close to being good but something (i.e. CGI, bad acting, pointless action, not reaching for enough depth) took me out of it and kept it from being as good as it could/should have been.
Overall not horrible, but a below average movie. All this can be blamed on the director or whomever was controlling him. There was some bad acting. Chris Hemsworth was as usual, towing the line between descent and bad. Even that falls onto whoever was in charge of this project.
4 of 10 - A lot of failed potential that overall just missed the mark.
A Good Day to Die Hard (2013)
Just Stop Already.
I'm a die hard, Die Hard fan but the last two incarnations, had no idea as to what a Die Hard movie should be. The last two movies were made under the thought that it's the action that made Die Hard. That couldn't be further from the truth. What made Die Hard was the normal man, surviving the odds. Which included a lot of action. In the last two Die Hard's John McClain has become near Superman instead of a common man who defies the odds. The only thing I'll give this movie is that is was better than Live Free Die Hard but that isn't saying much at all. Stop being unbelievably unrealistic and get back to the humanity of the original movies. Stop trying to pair Bruce Willis up with a young male lead. He doesn't need it and it doesn't work. After Die Hard with a Vengeance you can just stop watching. That's where the Die Hard's died for me.
4/10 not even an average movie. Which is really sad because the original 3 are action classic.
Grindhouse (2007)
Average Alone, Incredible Together
For anyone who knows nothing about the Grindhouse films, they were packaged for theater as 2 movies, similar to a double feature you would see at a drive-in in the 1970's. These two movies were directed by Quentin Tarantino & Robert Rodriguez. The 2 have previously teamed in collaborations like Desperado & From Dusk Til' Dawn. While I like Tarantino films regardless, I think Rodriguez is much better when he's working with Tarantino.
Death Proof (Tarantino's film) started off slow. Like many of his films. The movie was thick in classic Tarantino dialogue and the movie quickly became tiresome. Then in true Tarantino fashion the film reaches an action point. It was fairly early on but because the movie was so slow and uneventful in the beginning, when it does reach this first action series it has so much more impact. Then the movie kind of resets itself, almost beginning again. This time the movie is slow, filled full of dialogue and absolutely no intriguing events. The difference is that this time, as a fan, I know that it's all going to culminate in an exciting ending.
The movie seemed to have went for nearly an hour with nothing happening. Just when I was beginning to lose hope in Tarantino again, he delivers the big ending I wanted. I've heard arguments that the ending wasn't as big as people wanted. Watching it in theaters, having gotten truly enthralled into what was going on, I was completely into the ending. It gave me exactly what I wanted. It was simple but effective. Let me tell you the people in the half full theater that day popped for the ending. They, like me had gotten enthralled into what was going on and they were clapping and cheering. A few stood up and a couple shouted out. It was a hell of a movie experience that I haven't ever had before or since while at a public screening.
I suppose if you're half watching Death Proof at home you probably wouldn't get the same effect as if your entire attention had been grasped by the movie. Once again the hour of slow uneventful-ness paid off with an exciting ending that meant more simply because it was so slow for so long. That is how you build to a moment to get the most out of a little bit of action at it's best. If the movie had been full of action with an ending like that, it wouldn't have meant anything. Instead the movie spends the time investing you into the characters. Even if you at times began to hate them because so little was happening you were still unknowingly being invested into them. Then in the end it pays off.
The Fake Trailers in-between the two movies were hilarious and just plain awesome.
Planet Terror (Robert Rodriguez) was the biggest reason I was wary of Grindhouse. Some of Rodriguez's solo projects weren't very good at all. Planet Terror was heavily advertised with his girlfriend Rose McGowen having a machine gun for a leg. That made me the most wary. It was probably the most over the top, unrealistic and needless part of the movie. However I enjoyed both movies so much, it wasn't an issues like I thought it might be.
Planet Terror was complete action. While it was over the top, it didn't pass many boundaries that I didn't find acceptable. It probably helped the movie that it had a zombie movie feel about it. Since I discovered the original Romero trilogy of zombie films, I've been a fanatic like most. For me it's not just the zombie that I enjoy. I also enjoy the the survival aspect that the zombies force people into. Planet Terror gave me that. There's a lot that happens in this movie. Plenty of cameo's. Lot's of scenes that are just slightly over the top but awesome scenes none the less. For instant the scene with the penis falling off while Tarantino's about to rape someone. Again, the testicles scenes with Naveen Andrews was over the top but still enjoyable. The Pulp Fiction briefcase style scene when they open up the trunk and it turns out to be a mini-bike was absolutely hilarious. I hate people who tell me to go into a movie expecting certain things and accept it for what it is. Usually when they say that it's because it's a movie that I hate or one that just exceeds the level of over the top I'll accept. Yet you gotta go into this movie with that mindset. If you're like me, you'll enjoy this. You'll probably enjoy it more if you watch the two movies together.
Even after it was over, Death Proof was looked at like a slow paced, almost boring movie. Planet Terror provided the exact opposite. It was action personified. While either movie alone may only be slightly above average. One is too slow and the other too over the top. Combined the movies compliment each other so well that together they're much better. For anyone who hasn't seen these movies, I recommend not watching Death Proof or Planet Terror. Instead you should watch Grindhouse the way it was intended by watching both movies back to back in order with the trailers in between if possible. I don't know that you can duplicate the theater experience but if you come close you'll have a much more enjoyable movie experience.
8 of 10 - An original movie theater experience that sadly most people didn't get to enjoy.
Man of Steel (2013)
Over the Top & Missing A Realistic Human Element
I wanted to finally enjoy something Superman related and I thought that this movie might finally be it. Instead of getting the simple heart felt, love story, coming to terms with who he is story, this movie misses on all connections. It's an over the top action movie, that just did not connect with me on any level. It might have well had been an alien invasion movie as opposed to a Superman movie. The movie is full of explosions and building upon building being destroyed. If you're looking for an action movie full of mindless explosions and destruction that's what you'll get.
I wasn't a fan of Hollywood's last Superman incarnation at all. I still managed to think it was better than this movie. At least that one tried to give you a descent story that was somewhat Superman related. This movie is nothing but a Hollywood buck. If word of mouth doesn't get out about this movie and kill it's second weekend, I feel sorry for those you actually enjoy this action fluff. I'm not trying to just be negative but this movie flat out pi$$ed me off.
I can compare the difference in what I thought this movie should be and what it was by comparing it to the differences between Die Hard and Live Free or Die Hard. Die Hard is one of the most iconic "man" action movies out there. It had great action but was still a simple story of a man struggles and barley overcoming the near impossible. Live Free or Die Hard however was so over the top and unrealistic, it lost the simple realistic human elements that made the action from the original acceptable while also relating us John McClain's struggles.
The movie may just have not been for me. To make your own judgment I'll compare the movie once again. To me it seemed similar to the recent Thor movie with about 6 times the action. Like Thor, Man of Steel didn't have much depth. When it did try to connect it was so unrealistic and cheesy it was too much. The only realistic and relateable parts of the movie that had any depth was Kevin Costner playing Clark Kent's father. I know Costner was almost shunned by Hollywood because of a couple of big budget flops and because he's getting older but the best moments in the movie are with Costner and a young Clark. Jonathan Kent is definitely the only character I had an emotional attachment to.
There's really no actor I thought did bad in this. Costner stood out most and sadly Christopher Meloni had the next best performance in his very limited role. Richard Schiif (also a minimal role) was also good. While the other actors did fine I guess, I just really didn't connect with them. This movies downfall was the need for the ridiculous amount of action to story ratio.
3 of 10 - Probably a 4 off quality but for now it's frustrated me so much it gets a 3. I've always thought director Zack Snyder's '300' was overrated and slightly above average at best. If people go crazy for this Superman adaption then I'm just lost as to why people enjoy what the watch.
This Is the End (2013)
The Best Thing Seth Rogan Has Wrote Since The Pineapple Express!
If you loved the Pineapple Express this movie is on that level. Seth Rogan did a great job in his directorial debut. If you're a fan of Rogan and his click of friends, I don't see how you won't love This is the End. It gets wild and unrealistic but it's all in good fun. I watched it and Man of Steel this weekend and let me tell you that This is the End has more realistic and connect-able characters in it than that big budget sh!+ sandwich I had to eat while setting through Man of Steel. There's great "Rogan" comedy throughout this film with the buddy atmosphere you want in a movie with a cast of characters like this. If, like me, you enjoyed Pineapple Express the most of the ever growing long list of Rogan comedies, know that I rank this movie right up there with Superbad, Pineapple, Zack & Miri, etc...
8 of 10 - It'll only ever be appreciated by fans but if you like the other films these guys make you'll enjoy this one too.
Bates Motel (2013)
I Tried and Tried Again
There's just way too much wrong with the logic of this show for me to forgive. They've failed to build the Mother, son relationship like it should be. Norman's mother isn't as controlling as she should be. Norman having a brother takes away leaps and bounds from the, momma's boy, only child that Norman should be.
Besides all of those flaws. Which if you treat the series as if it weren't related to Psycho is doable. There's just way too many fails in logic. Someone saw, Norman's mother talking to the man she killed? In the middle of nowhere? A bus stop just outside the Bates house? In the middle of nowhere along a street that pretty much only has the one house near? A convenient strip club and small organized crime syndicate in a small town? I live in a small town. The girls father crashes his car right in front of the kids. Just far enough away that they could still run to him.
The whole thing is just not thought out well enough.
4 of 10 Stars - I only made it two episodes before deciding my life could be spent better doing something else.
Safety Not Guaranteed (2012)
The Quality of Movie that Should be in Theaters
This was a genuinely good movie. It's offbeat and a little quirky the way a good indy movie should be. I'm not going to give anything away to those fellow indy movie lovers out there. A great indy movie is usually discovered with the watcher knowing little to nothing about the movie going into it. I'll say that if you enjoy movies like, Garden State, Little Miss Sunshine, Napoleon Dynamite, Wristcutters, Dan in Real Life, Eagle vs Shark, Perks of Being a Wallflower, Sunshine Cleaning then you'll probably enjoy Safety Not Guaranteed. In my opinion quality movies like this should get a wider theatrical release over horribly done blockbuster budget movies like G.I. Joe and Transformer 3.
8 of 10 Stars - A really great movie
Mama (2013)
No Pan's Labyrinth but Not Bad Either
I go into this movie with the recommendation of Guillermo del Toro, director of Pan's Labyrinth. I believe del Toro also "presented" the Orphanage when it came out. Since I really enjoyed both Labyrinth & Orphanage, I went to theaters for Mama. Mama never had the feel or felt on the same level as either Pan's Labyrinth or the Orphanage to me. It may have been wrong of me to go into this movie with expectations on such a high level as it's predecessors (so to speak).
I liken Mama more toward the two similar Sam Raimi directed/produced fails (in my opinion) "Drag Me to Hell" and "Possession". Mama is more similar to the two Raimi tainted movies than the del Toro ones. Where Mama is better than the Raimi movies is that it's actually a horror movie that will get some reaction. I watched all three movies in theaters. Neither Drag me to Hell or Possession got a reaction from the theater crowd. That is unless you count me. I laughed a few times at the ridiculousness. Mama on the other hand was a very similar type of movie but was made well enough to be considered a descent horror film.
My personal reasons with rating this movie only above average is that, there's been numerous movies of it's kind made in recent years. While this one is not bad, it also doesn't stand out with the best either. For my taste they showed the "evil character" far too often for it to be scary. Luckily the CGI was just good enough not to ruin the movie or anything but I did see a couple of scenes that looked like they were done just because they could do it. In my personal opinion, wait for video unless you just absolutely want to see it. When you do go into it, expect something along the lines of Drag me to Hell or Possession instead of Orphanage and Pan's Labyrinth.
6 of 10 rating. Worth watching in my opinion but save it for DVD/BluRay/Netflix/Streaming/however you cheaply watch movies. It's a movie someone will mention to me in 3-5 years and I'll remember but only barely. An enjoyable two hours but overall it just blends in.
Dexter (2006)
Roller Coaster Series
First off, I love the show. It's great series that's hardly been topped in television history. There are many great characters with varying depth and wonderful acting.
All the mush aside the series is also one of the most roller coaster series I've ever seen. I rate the series as an 8/10 and I've considered giving it a 9. If I were to rate each season though they range from 5-10. The first season was amazing. A 9 or 10. The second season may have even topped that. Then the third season comes along and it's like pulling teeth. I loved Jimmy Smits in NYPD Blue and I think he did a surprisingly great job in Sons of Anarchy. Watching him in Dexter however was horrendous. It wasn't Jimmy though. It wasn't bad acting or anything like that. It was just the way the whole season was laid out. I don't know the direction the creative team was going. To this day I never looked into whether there were changes in writing, producing, directing, etc. but the third season was so bad I stopped watching for almost 3 years. Getting back to Dexter 3 years later I was pleased to see the 4th & 5th season get back into the Dexter stride. While not as good as the first couple they were both solid. The 6th season was my favorite besides the original first two. The Brother Sam character (and the actor who portrayed him) as well as Colin Hanks and Edward James Olmos were terrific. The 7th season had series changing potential but to me it's been the worst since the 3rd season. It's a roller coaster series full of highs and lows. At times it'll give you exactly what you want and at other times make you mad all season.
For anyone who also reads the book series, I am a fan of both. As a fan of both I'll tell you that you have to treat the two as two separate entities. You have to treat it as dual dimensions or something of that nature if you want to get nerdy about it. Treat it like the multiple Spider-man movies. Two different takes of the same stories. The first part of the first season follows the book very closely. Then by the end of the season it goes into it's own direction. The second season is influenced by the book but only slightly. Beyond season two of the series there's only a few comparisons. Oddly the series was at it's best when it was influenced by the books but I enjoy the series more than the books altogether. I will say that I won't be completely satisfied unless the series takes advantage of the incredibly controversial 5th book (Dexter is Delicious) before the TV series ends. In my opinion Dexter is Delicious is the best of the books series.
8 of 10 - Not always on the same level but still overall it's one of the best.
Savages (2012)
If Sex and Drugs Sell, Why is this Movie so Bad?
I'm not an Oliver Stone fan and I'm not a Benico Del Toro fan. Not to say that neither of them have done good work because they have. They've both done far more middle of the road films and performances than stand out ones though. I personally feel that those who talk about how good of a director Stone is and how good an actor Del Toro is don't know what they're talking about. That includes those who are supposed to know what they're talking about within the business. This movie was all sex and drugs and lacked any heart to get you (or me at least) to care about anything that happens in the movie. It's simple. If I don't care, why am I watching? There's no shock value that this movie provides that hasn't been done before. So I'm not wowed by that. There's no 'wow' story line or scenes. There's certainly no heartfelt performances.
3 of 10 - I feel I'm being generous there. I simply cared about no one or nothing in the movie.
Lawless (2012)
A Low Appeal Film that was Genuinely Good
I have to admit that when this movie came out I lumped it in with HBO's Boardwalk Empire. Both lacked appeal but seemed up my ally of things I'd like. I considered going to theaters to see it but the lack of appeal and all, I waited. Once I did watch it I really enjoyed it. I knew nothing of the true story so I can't compare it to real life. Usually when I compare real life to movies or books to movies, then I don't enjoy the movie. In this case I fortunately didn't know the true story or read the book and the film was very enjoyable.
There were continuity issues throughout the film but to me it was all small stuff that I could overlook. The biggest two downfalls of the movie in my opinion was the montage in the early mid-part of the movie. If you're going to give me a montage at least play me some 80's music to go alone with it. The movie also felt like it ran longer than it did. Yeah, I know I just complained about a montage shortening the movie and the movie feeling like it ran long. Trust me, they could have done away with the montage, added some time to the length of the movie and still not made it feel like a 3 hour movie if done right.
The best part of the movie in my opinion was Tom Hardy's performance. I've seen Hardy in a couple of films but I wasn't a huge fan or anything. Watching this movie I noticed just how good of an actor he was. I believe his performance took this movie up a level. For me Shia Lebouf has become so out of touch with reality he turns me off from a movie almost as much as Tom Cruise does. It's not that I dislike Lebouf. I actually quite enjoyed him when he was younger and he's a fine actor. I just no longer have a desire to see him. Actually I'd prefer not to see him whenever possible. To me this movie is worth it. Lebouf did fine in his performance. Hardy clearly stole the show though. Not only from Lebouf but also from yet another good performance by Gary Oldman and an over the top but good performance from Guy Pierce who's transformed himself once again. The actress Mia Wasikowska (I had to look up her name) did a wonderful performance in her limited role as well. She was perhaps second only to Hardy in this movie for me.
8 of 10 - Yeah there were flaws (as all movies have) but several good performances from great actors and two great performances from two up and coming actors/actresses made this movie stand out.
Meeting Evil (2012)
Great Cast, Decent Plot, Horrible Execution
This movie has one of my personal favorite actors, Samuel L. Jasckson in it. As well as Luke Wilson, another actor I enjoy. These two take up the majority of screen time and there's familiar faces of decent actors throughout the rest of the film. Beyond the on screen talent the plot is a decent one to work with. Without giving too much away I'll say it's a familiar plot of one man meeting another man who slowly turns his life into a nightmare.
Where this movie fails and the reason it's a straight to DVD/BluRay/Netflix, etc. instead of a 9 million dollar nation wide release is purely in the movies execution. When you can't blame the acting and you can't blame the script then the finger must get pointed at the man behind the camera. In this case it's Chris Fisher, director of ever worsening straight to DVD/BluRay/Netflix, etc. movies and average to bad TV shows peaking with the horrible SyFy series Warehouse 13. While I won't go so far as to say this movie is as bad as the horrid movies SyFy is responsible for, it did at times seem like a badly filmed lifetime movie. The actors and script were also at times worse than a SyFy movie. Specifically when Luke Wilson comes home and converses with his wife at the beginning of the movie. I cringed because I knew Luke Wilson was a better actor than that.
While not a complete waste, this movie is watchable but by no means is it one that you should go out of your way not to miss.
4 of 10 - There were good actors giving lacking, and at times bad performances. All in a movie with a decent plot but bad and at times horrible dialogue. All in an overall fail of a movie. The makings were there for a good movie and someone without talent (probably the director) got in the way.
Doghouse (2009)
Near Perfect Comedy Horror!
The closest thing to Shaun of the Dead since, well, Shaun of the Dead. While looking for Horror movies for Halloween 2012, I came across the trailer for this movie. Between the lower IMDb rating and the fact I've never heard of the movie (though I'm well versed in movies) I didn't think too much about including this one. In the end the movie made the cut as our Horror comedy of the night. Boy am I glad it did.
After 2011's Tucker and Dale vs. Evil as our Horror Comedy on Halloween Movie night, I was rather disappointed that this low rated British film I hadn't heard of was the best thing we could come up with for a comedy horror. This movie was a pleasant surprise and great find. I found this movie just as good (or nearly as good) as my personal favorites mentioned above in Shaun of the Dead and Tucker and Dale vs Evil. If you're fans of those movies this should be right up your alley. It's sad this didn't get a wider release in the states or at least that any buzz it might have had didn't reach me. The make-up effects are rather cheesy but if you go with the flow it just works! I absolutely love the comical concept and the video game style women!
7 of 10 and one of the best in it's Genre!
Emergo (2011)
Paranormal Activity Without the Realism & Anticipation
While filmed well (which is saying more than most straight to DVD/BluRay/Redbox/Netflix/Online Streaming horror flicks) this movie fails on so many other levels. Shot like a ghost hunting TV show with an obvious Paranormal Activity influence. A common copycat trend these days with low budget horror. This movie originally stands out with better actors, acting and camera work than most movies of this copycat genre. I said originally stands out. At first I thought it was going to be good. Where the movie failed for me was the lack anticipation and build up to those supposed to be climatic moments. Moments you can see coming from miles away. Though it's filmed like a documentary or reality TV show there's little reality as the movie progresses. I thought the acting was surprisingly good with the exception of the 25 year old girl playing a teenager (thanks Hollywood) and Michael O'Keefe who stood out like a sore thumb at the school of bad acting. It's surprising considering O'Keefe was probably the most accredited actor coming into this film from late 80's, early 90's ventures like Caddy Shack and Roseanne.
Compiling a list of what ruined this well filmed but poorly executed rip-off of a movie for me was so... Horribly predictable movie. No build up or anticipation or realistic feel to anything that happened. Michael O'Keefe's horrible performance that stood out like bad CGI in an otherwise descent movie. Another 20+ year old actress failing to play a teenager. Real Teenagers need work too Hollywood! Not all of them are starring in reality shows! For a supposedly documentary/TV show filmed movie there were too many unexplained cuts in the camera work. This movie is supposed to be footage of a camera man's recording with a few hand placed cameras throughout the apartment and it gives no explanation of random cuts from one camera to another that obviously can't be either the camera mans footage or the placed camera's footage.
3 of 10 - A fail on almost all levels. At least it didn't have any bad CGI or at least any that stood out so much that I remember.
House at the End of the Street (2012)
Low Expectations and Still Disappointed
The trailer for the movie made it look decent. I didn't have overly high expectations for the film going in. Every October I try and watch as many horror movies in theaters as I can. This one made the list for 2012.
The first hour of the movie has the feeling of the late 70's early 80's suspense horror films. You know, the ones that build up and build up all the while being slightly too slow to be good but you stick with it because you know the climax is coming.
So I set through the first hour of this movie with it's horrible camera shots which includes, close-ups that are too close and more than one camera shot that was out of focus for no good reason. I also set through the bad acting. The more movies I see Jennifer Lawrence in (who's the main actress) the more I realize that she's not a very good actress. There's just no depth there. Beyond my growing dislike for her, I know Elisabeth Shue is a capable actress and her performance in this movie was almost as lacking as Jennifer Lawrence. This leads me to believe that the bad camera shots and bad acting are both the directors fault. One hour of absolutely no horror. No horror for an hour of a horror movie. Basically the first hour was build up. Though some points of the movie were laughable it had a slight old school horror movie build-up, bad acting and laugh-ability that kept me watching.
Where the movie failed for me was the climatic finish. The turn from the hour build-up to realizing what was going on was actually pretty great. The Penn State shirt was the best shot of the film. The problem was that once the "bad guy" had been revealed the movie was WAY too predictable to still be enjoyable. Beyond all of that there were several weak, unrealistic, Hollywood sequences in the movie that weren't overlook-able because the movie was too bad to overlook such flaws. In addition the movie steals several angles from movies like Sleepaway Camp and Frankenstein that would have been homage paying if the movie was better but since it wasn't better, it was just insulting in my opinion. I thought I was going into a horror movie but it ended up feeling more like an hour long teen drama with a half hour semi-horror movie ending. I say semi-horror movie because only 3 people died in this movie beyond the opening sequence. One of them didn't have a speaking role. Another was only in one speaking scene and the third had a very minimal role.
Though disappointing for a theatrical release it would have been a descent find for a straight to BluRay/Netflix movie. Unfortunately it was not straight to a Redbox near me and I felt my money was wasted in theaters.
Just so this isn't all negative I'll say that I really did enjoy the Penn State reveal and the actor/actress who played the killer did a good job though I really didn't see him/her as the killer so much.
4 of 10 - Wait for DVD and only watch this if you're a suspense thriller fan who enjoys the average to below average thrillers.
The Grey (2011)
Horrible CGI and Bad Camera-work
I suppose I had unrealistic expectations, expecting a kick-ass, action movie in the way of Taken just because of Liam Neeson was in this movie. It wasn't fair to go into this with such expectations. Regardless of my expectations this movie had a horrible opening where I wasn't sure what was going on. They followed that up with some of the most unrealistic looking wolves I've every seen depicted in a live action film. The camera work was also spotty, at times being professionally done while at other times seeming like the Blair Witch Project. Though it's not an original idea, I do love the concept of the movie. The acting was fine as well. As someone who will watch and enjoy almost any movie, the reason this was only a 3 stars to me was the fact that the Grey hit on my only two pet peeves for movies. Number 1 is Bad CGI. I'm sorry but if you can't do CGI well then don't do it at all because bad CGI makes an otherwise perfectly okay movie nearly unwatchable. This is the reason the SyFy channel should not exist in my opinion. Number 2 is shotty camera work. I'm fine with the Blair Witch Project if that's what your movie is based on with camera work but for a movie to offer me professional style camera work then get shaky when the action starts, just pi$$es me off. I understand a shaky camera keeps you from clearly seeing the bad CGI but the bad CGI shouldn't have been there in the first place. Very disappointing.
3 of 10 - A couple of overlooked details (quality CGI & camera work) ruin an otherwise 6 of 10 movie.
Sons of Anarchy (2008)
SOA equals Television Gold
*********************ONLY MINUTE SPOILERS*******************
I absolutely love Sons of Anarchy. It's a FX, television version of shows like, The Wire, The Sopranos and Deadwood. SOA seems like it should be on a network like HBO and though it may lose something small in the cable translation, it's also a success where many HBO shows that were similar were canceled prematurely.
The third season of SOA lags to be honest. While I was perfectly happy as a fan of watching the everyday toils of the Sons of Anarchy in Charming, the show felt the need to turn SOA into Belfast Bikers which is what I feel I'm watching most of this season. Unfortunately like many shows before it, SOA felt the need escalate the show as the seasons progressed. I feel other fans like me would much prefer them keeping the show on the level we've learned to love. When I say all of this I think of Dexter and how it started so strong and tried to build the show into something bigger when I the fan would've been happy with more of the same. Dexter eventually pulled themselves out of the lag and the series as a whole is still great. I'm still working on finishing season 3. Hopefully they'll pull themselves out of the Belfast lag. Hopefully even by seasons end.
Still a great show with my full recommendation. If you like any of the other shows I've mentioned in this review I have no doubt you'll love Sons.
9 of 10 - Television doesn't get much better.
Thor (2011)
I found myself laughing, yet it isn't a comedy.
I enjoyed Iron Man, I found the two Hulk movies in 5 years laughable but okay. I'm sorry but it's just hard to enjoy a movie with obvious CGI that looks completely unrealistic. So coming into Thor I had no expectations. I knew going in that it and probably Captain America were both movies that were only produced to set up an Avengers movie. While watching the movie I found myself laughing. Dialogue was completely predictable as well as was everything else in the movie. There was little heart and no character depth. This movie had a good director, a suburb cast and obviously a large budget. There was no reason for it to have been this bad other than the lack of a script. In my opinion it's a thrown together, forced movie that never needed to be made. The only perk of this movie was a couple of good battle scenes. The best of which started the movie off, which left the ending to be anti-climatic to say the least. I know a lot of people enjoyed this movie but I just can't understand why. I blame everyone who signed up to do this paycheck of a movie for it's existence.
3 of 10 - A very fair rating in my opinion. If you like movies like, Priest, Legion, Hulk, The Incredible Hulk, Jonah Hex etc... with lots of action and little else then you may like this movie. Otherwise save your money.
Priest (2011)
0 for 2
Priest is directed by the same man who gave us "Legion". Need I say more? It's simple. If you were able to like Legion then you may enjoy this movie. In my opinion however this movie ran through a back story far too quickly in order to get us to where the movie begins. Then the movie fills itself, every scene, every line, with climatic scene after climatic scene not even realizing that if you don't build up to a climatic point in a movie then there's really no effect once it happens.
Even though I was accepting of the comic book world the movie shows. Which is a stretch for me. The movie still failed in providing much depth with it's characters. The fight scenes were certainly lacking, which in a movie like this, fight scenes are usually the highlight because they have so little else going for them. I found myself laughing at the key points of the movie which were obviously meant to wow the audience with it's "amazing action scenes" that were un-enjoyable because they were over done. Or I'd find myself laughing at a twist in the movie that was seen coming from far away.
3 of 10 - A fair rating in my opinion. It's also my opinion that Scott Charles Stewart has failed miserably in his first two full feature movie attempts to produce anything worth watching.
UFC 43: Meltdown (2003)
Big Names, Mediocre Event
A lot of big names leads to a mediocre event.
Tank vs Kimo was a bust. Tank's return proved just how much the sport had grown since he'd left.
The Mir vs Sims DQ and the quick Belfort vs Eastman fight left me wanting more.
I thought I'd get more in Liddell vs Couture. In my opinion two of the three greatest fighters to ever enter the octagon. The fight was good but could not compare to what I thought it should be. Chuck shaking his head at the end of the 1st showed me he, like many others might not have realized what a tuff opponent Randy would be.
Memorable Moment - Yves Edwards Biattch slapping/kicking Eddie Ruiz in the kick heard round the world. Probably sounded worse than it actually was but I doubt it felt good.
6 of 10 (Some undercard busts & a disappointing but good main event)
UFC 59: Reality Check (2006)
Two Great Main Events
Griffin vs. Ortiz showed signs of the classic Griffin v. Bonner slugfest. I didn't give Griffin a chance going into this fight but was proved wrong. I still think Ortiz would've done much better at 100% but Griffin proved he can hang. Great fight.
Sylvia vs. Arlovski II - I think these two will always be good for an exciting fight against each other.
Sean Sherk vs. Nick Diaz & Monson vs. Cruz were both busts. Sherk & Diaz seemed to have each other scouted too well and it surprisingly didn't live up to expectations.
Parisyan v. Thompson - Parisyan elbow = lots of blood. A lot of blood very quick from a single shot.
Memorable Moment - Ortiz v. Griffin slugfest.
8 of 10 (Ortiz v. Griffin, Sylvia v. Arlovski need I say more?)
UFC 58: USA vs. Canada (2006)
USA 5 vs Canada 3
A little weak on name fighters and a lot of fights going the distance. Sometimes thought I was watching a Pride instead of UFC.
B.J. Penn vs. Georges St.-Pierre made up for what a lot of the fights lacked. It's an immediate classic.
Rich Franklin vs. David Loiseau - Franklin dominated. Loiseau came out strong in the 1st but once he felt Franklin's hands I think he knew who the better fighter was that night. Loiseau gave away the 2nd round. By the 3rd round Loiseau adjusted to Franklin's striking which he'd obviously underestimated and gave a couple of rounds of good fighting. By the final round he'd taken too much punishment and Franklin dominated again.
Memorable Moment - Loiseau running like a scarred BIATCH from Franklin.
7 of 10 (Without Penn v. St.-Pierre it would've been lower)
UFC 56: Full Force (2005)
No Headliners but 4 Pre-Main Event Worthy Fights
The event would have been better if it had been Karo Parisyan vs. Matt Hughes in the co-main event. With Parisyan out he was replaced by Joe "middle card fighter at best" Riggs, who was out of his element against Matt "Possibly the best fighter(or Randy Couture?)the UFC's ever seen" Hughes.
The main event was another slightly mismatched fight in Rich Franklin vs. Nate Quarry.
The mid-card fights made up for what the main event lacked with two future UFC champions Georges St.-Pierre vs. Sean Sherk & Jeremy Horn vs. Trevor Prangley.
There were several UFC newcomers in the early fights but no bad matches except for the Jordan Vs. Gonzaga snore fest which is worth sticking around for just for the ending.
Memorable moment - Rich Franklin knocking out Nate Quarry.
7 of 10 (No headliner but 4 quality fights)
UFC 2: No Way Out (1994)
Better Fighters but not as Good
Shamrock's injury left UFC 2 with only one star, Royce Gracie.
The fighters overall were better than 1 but with the tournament advancing to a 16 man from 8 man, they seemed tiresome & often beaten uneventfully.
The announce team advanced from not knowing what they were doing 1, to doing a Q&A with the only commentator who knew anything about fighting.
With Shamrock not in it Royce dominated with no resistance. It was nice to see the cocky kick-boxer Pat Smith who had worked on his ground defense after being submitted by Shamrock in UFC 1, have to tap while Royce held him down and punched him. Royce didn't submit him, he punched him till he tapped. Proving that in MMA striking alone will only get you (so) Tank Abbott far.
Memoralbly Moment - Pat Smith tearing up Scott Morris's face.
4 of 10 (Royce dominated w/ no competition)