Month: December 2012

Broken record.

Sorta-fun little action movie that gets less and less fun as it goes along. 

I say “little” because you’ve seen it all before.  Well…except the old “dropping down and firing the gun from between the heroine’s legs” trick…if I’ve seen it once, I’ve seen it a million times…

It’s like someone took all the outtakes and spare parts from ‘Con Air’ and ‘The Rock’ and just decided to make the same movie…ONE…MORE…TIME!

Also, Howie Long’s acting comes up just a little bit short.

Inspirational Quote: “Would you mind not shooting at the thermonuclear weapons…”

Grade: D+

7/14/18: The Great Grade Update. Wretched, but a little bit fun. My fav re-watched moment is when a guy gets hit in the head with a hammer and proceeds to jump back a few feet before falling on the ground dead. Awfully decent of him. Grade: D-

“Lost Python” my a$$. 

I know Cleese said it, but when he said it he was an old man who had forgotten what it was like to actually write a funny joke.

Izzard rants with the irreverence and SOME of the wit of ‘Flying Circus’, but he’s not nearly as good as Cleese was in his prime.  Or Idle, or Chapman, or Palin, or Jones, or Gilliam.  So at best Izzard would have to be the distant 7th Python…and he’d have to fight with Neil Innes and Carol Cleveland over that honor.

So with that bullsh1t comparison aside, he’s a fairly funny guy: he’s got some intelligence and some wit.  He doesn’t have any timing, unfortunately…his comedy is haphazard rant mode. 

I suppose, in that way, his standup could be seen as similar to ‘Flying Circus’.  But only on the shallowest, most meaningless basis.

‘Flying Circus’ was haphazard because they wrote brilliant (and brilliantly TIMED) bits and then needed to somehow link them together…so they went with Gilliam’s brilliant haphazard nonsense. 

Izzard’s haphazard cuz that’s how he is.  And unlike Gilliam, he ain’t brilliant.

So what’s the big deal?

Grade: C+

To save you almost 3 hours of wasted time…

Watch the opening bits by Eddie Izzard, Jon Stewart w/Kim Jong-un, and Russell Brand w/some other guy.  Then stop. 

After that, it’s best summed up by a guy yawning during Sarah Silverman’s routine.

Grade: D-

Horrible music, horrible FX, horrible acting, horrible writing, horrible fake boobs, horrible gothy angst attempts, horrible “noone understands me” laments, horrible band product placement, horrible hair extensions, horrible HAIKIBA! moments, horribly dull blood ritual for Nosferatu, horribly easy-to-kill vampires.

Makes sex, drugs, rock n’ roll and devil worship seem just kinda boring.

56:05 – Oh thank God.

1:02:26 – Don’t LAUGH during a blood ceremony! HOLD IT IN, GIRL!

Grade: F-

Hey…it’s the same judgy-wudgy as in ‘Disorder In The Court’.

Almost as bad as ‘Triumph Of The Will’, but a HECK of a lot funnier. 

Oops.  I meant SCARIER. 

This reveals what is almost as much a danger to the world as the Wiccan Agenda! Dun Dun DUN!

Featuring plenty of good old-fashioned wholesome TOBACCO smoking.

Graded like ‘Troll 2’, or pure hydro.

Grade: C

Dull, tedious crime drama interspersed with rare helpings of muddled superstition and conflicting musical backgrounds.  The only good thing about it is that it’s well-acted.  But that doesn’t stop it from being terminally boring.

Grade: D-

Lots of public domain footage pasted together and crudely overdubbed.  And by crudely I mean it’s not exactly brilliant and it’s not exactly family-friendly.

The only problem is I actually laughed a few times, so I can’t say it’s truly worthless.  Although when I WASN’T laughing, which was the majority of the time, I was thinking “My GOD this sucks”.

It’s like ‘What’s Up, Tiger Lily?’ done to bad sci-fi/softcore porn/50’s B&W nostalgia.

Grade: D

A “travesty”?  Come on.  That implies a massive fall from grace/greatness, which in this case is simply not possible.  Greatness must first exist for it to be desecrated/lost.

I saw the animated series when it was new, on Liquid Television.  It was amazing and incredible to me then, with visuals that were simply beyond both belief and description: grandiose and grotesque.

But I also had NO FCKEN IDEA what was going on, nor do I now looking back on it.

So if all you’re looking for is a collection of fantastic someone-else’s-dreamscape images to stare at and go “Wow…” to, this film treatment won’t do it.  Watch the original.

But I’ve reached the point in the growth of my somewhat-limited creativity/imagination that I can conjure up my own surreal dreamscapes if/when I want to by the simple expedient of closing my eyes, and I can imbue them with my OWN meaning…not wonder what some other guy was thinking when he made up his.

Unlike the original, there’s a coherent story that you can follow here, if you want to…nothing amazing or incredible, but at least comprehensible.  And somewhat interesting.  And it’s only “not weird” in comparison to the series…it’s VERY weird.

“Dumbed-down-for-the-masses” this ain’t.  “Made-sensible-for-the-sane”, more like it.

Aeon’s incredible acrobatic abilities and precision and a lot of this movie’s FX are like the attempt to climb the north face of the Uxbridge Road: Like them or not, you’ve got to admire the skill that goes into them.

Inspirational Quote: “We’re meant to die.  That’s what makes anything about us matter.”

AND…”Whatever we are, we’re not anarchists.  There have to be rules.”

Grade: C+

Not nearly as scary as the Nerve-Ending Fairy.

Thankfully the writer went to the trouble of making quite a few really bad, boring characters to utter the really bad, boring lines.  It’s only fair to spread ’em around.

Carrie Anne Fleming is a lot less interesting here than she is in ‘Jenifer’, even though she doesn’t wear any disfiguring makeup and actually speaks.  Her appearance here seems to be saying “I’m a SERIOUS actress.  I can do DRAMA.” No you’re not, no you can’t.

30:58 – Great Parenting 101 (Mother rescues child from the sight of extreme overacting)

Inspirational Quote: “What’s your d1ck doin’ over there, Chuck?”

Grade: F

*Sliced and Spliced from 9/29/12 – Behold*

Opening = Demon Summoning For Dummies

It’s all creepy/cool until he kicks over a candle. Twice. At least the theme music has the sense to stop then.

So, I think it’s gonna be this attempt at an amazingly grandiose gothic love story…and then I find out suddenly it’s gonna be this attempt at a gothy comedy/horror parody.  And then it sort of keeps switching back and forth.

Points for…originality?  No…somewhat-uniqueness, in the willingness to do really
silly things and risk being REALLY horrific instead of just generic-horrific.

It’s not PARTICULARLY funny. It’s actually…kind of…sweet.

It’s also weird, quirky, “different”, and…hmmm…

“Please…DON’T say it’s ‘fascinating’…”
“No. *Slight Headshake* But it is…interesting.”

Inspirational Quote: “You summoned me for LOVE???”

Grade: C+

9/30/12: Warning: Having seen this once, you might want to watch it again shortly thereafter.
When I watched it again, I found myself wishing semi-fervently (it’s not THAT good a movie) that
everyone/thing but the main characters could be completely erased as meaningless, or at least
drastically reduced in air time, and replaced with more interaction between the only things that
matter. All the others are just annoying, and make me think “Why am I watching this???”…until it
goes back to the main characters. Then I understand.

I also understand why I semi-fervently wish this was much better written.

Grade: B (Unless you’ve never experienced intense suffering in your life…then it remains C+)

10/15/12: In the final analysis, even a downtrodden “lovelorn” cynic like myself must
say with extreme conviction that the potential upside to watching this film (“Wow…”) is
completely worth the potential downside (“Stupid…”). I think the first…I can’t help it.
It’s how I’m wired. And I’m glad.

Grade: B+

5/25/15: “You just pray to see (something) that hasn’t changed…
one that looks (to) you exactly as it did before.”

Grade: B+

Lots of quasi-mythology and nipple talk make for a mildly interesting setup.

Then it just gets pretty stupid, unable to decide between silly-stupid and “scary”-stupid.

The theory that the reason it’s so meaningless and disjointed is because it’s about tripping on mushrooms is one that is strongly advanced by the director, the actors, and some of their friends.

Grade: F

Black and white silent with subtitles.

Short film version of H.P. Lovecraft’s short story of the same name.

Mildly intriguing, in a non-terrifying cheezy sort of way, with some interesting observations.  But it’s better either played or read about in one of any number of superior forms; some by Lovecraft, some by those he inspired.

Grade: D+

7/14/18: The Great Grade Update. Grade: C-

Horrible but certainly not horrifying.

1:04:00 – Even in death, they manage to give her another cleavage shot.

1:14:44 – And one for the road.

Favorite Dumb Moment: Eerie “GENERATOR” sign music.

Grade: F

Three unconvincing actors play three dumb unconvincing friends who buy a box with a supposed ghost inside of it in this unconvincing horror flick.

Note to self: When attempting to purchase an angry, tormented rampaging spirit ALWAYS have enough room on credit card.

Grade: F

French with subtitles.

But don’t let that dissuade you.  Because if you like this type of movie, it’s actually pretty good.  Pretty gory, but if you can deal with that, worth watching.

It’s an infection movie that’s much more akin to ’28 Days Later’ and “Rage” than anything zombie-ish.  Not only for the behavior of the infected, but because it’s shot in a way that’s fairly reminiscent of ’28 Days Later’, and actually almost as well.

Other similiarities: believable characters (some), a love story (of sorts) amidst the carnage, and lots of interesting visuals: some disturbing, some pretty.  I’m not saying it’s as good…it’s not.  Part of that has to do with the budget (a full evacuation of large parts of a major city costs money) and part with the mediocrity of some of the supporting cast.

But the two main actors are quite good, especially the female lead, who conveys a fairly wide range of emotions/nuances of character, along with great warmth and dedication towards the…being…she loves.

Maybe I’m getting too artsy here, but it seems to me that with the mostly cold/blue/icy images, the director was attempting to portray the bleakness and lack of feeling or mercy of the world and most of its characters, to which the leads stand in stark contrast.

One of the infected is actually more decent than some of the humans.  Why does it seem I’m ALWAYS saying that regarding non-human life forms???

Grade: B-