Category: Movie/Long Subject Reviews

Pointless half-a$$ed echo of the original: a collection of re-gurgitated re-animated gags/grossouts.

For dedicated fans only.

Inspirational Foot Scene: Kootchie-Kootchie-Koo!

Grade: D-

The reason this particular movie failed upon release is that it’s not very good.

George Romero had a nice little idea about reanimated corpses attacking and eating people, but then he got silly.

That’s all, really…he was never much of a writer, or a director; aside from ‘Night’ and ‘Land’, he’s made mostly cheezy, occasionally interesting cr@p.

A few interesting-creepy moments half an hour in here, a few more intermittently throughout. Besides them, it’s cr@p.

Upped a notch for the superior remake it inspired.

Particularly lame: the cutaways from a poorly-written military highups convo to really stupid military ACTION! bits.

Pretty d@mn bad: The writing in general.

Almost as bad: The acting in general…but then again, it’s hard to act well given these lines. Also, George has a habit of hiring non-actors to act: one from here reappears as a dumb-a$$ in ‘Dawn’, another moves on to bigger and better-acted things as Frankenstein in ‘Day’.

Fav bad bit: Persistent suit-muffled dialogue.

Inspirational Defiance: Ted Striker goes berserk.

Inspirationally Dated Song: The end theme.

Inspirational Monotone Quote: “Stop where you are…”

Grade: D-

Completism: A Puppy Perspective.

Sh1t movie.

Grade: F

A really sweet documentary about a group of dogs rescued and then slowly nursed to good health and adoptability.

Something to watch if you love dogs and love seeing them be happy, because *SPOILER ALERT* they all end up happy.

Like most documentaries, if you like the subject matter (and it’s well-made) you’ll like it, and it you don’t (or it isn’t) you won’t.

I love dogs, and the people involved seem just as happy to help them as dog lovers will be to see them get helped.

If you don’t like dogs (wtf is wrong with you?) you won’t like it.

Grade: C+ (A+ for rescue-dog lovers, F- for puppy mill advocates)

7/14/18: The Great Grade Update. Grade: B

Like every Mel Brooks movie, this has some jokes that just fall completely flat. Boring, cliche, obvious. Not funny.

For the first third, that happens maybe once. Really good stuff.

After that, the idea descends from inspired scenes, bits, and riffs to mostly lame and half-a$$ed character “interaction” and “development”…and Brooks sucks at that, so there aren’t any characters to interact/develop.

There are some good bits, but they’re scattered…enough to keep you watching for more but a steep cliff drop-off for the most part.

Smart move, I guess…draw ’em in with the good stuff and keep ’em hanging around for more. But man this mofo is overrated.

And Madeline Kahn sucks.

Inspirational Quote: “Excuse me while I whip this out…”

Grade: C

Basically just a succession of tortures (mental and physical) and attempts at escape by a psycho and his kidnapped neighbor, respectively. Very little before or after.

Compelling (believable, decently-acted, creepy) enough to make it interesting, but gory and disgusting enough to make it revolting.

It left me with a hollow, mildly nauseous feeling. And, unless you’re a sociopath, a psychopath, an extreme sadist, and/or an extreme masochist, it will quite probably have a similar effect on you.

If you *do* enjoy being shocked and disgusted – I mean REALLY – then this is probably on the lower end of your disgust-o-meter.

Because while it might fit loosely on the level of ‘Cut’ and ‘Dumplings’, it takes that … Extra bit of graphic disgustingness and wastes it on the mild pretense of a story, dramatic pauses, mood, and the believable character reactions of the female lead.

It has a happy ending, of sorts. I mean, reaping the whirlwind and all that.

Grade: D-

Shatner: dull. He drinks more as the movie goes on, suggesting a possibleway to tolerate it.

Family visit: sucks
Boy in a tree: sucks
Crime scene visit: kinda creepy
Santa and his zombie elves: cheezy cr@p

Ending: horrible

No, it’s not quite stupid enough to be funny.

No, you can’t just watch the non-sh1tty one, because it cuts back n’ forth between them all until the end.

Inspirational Quote: “Elves becoming the walking dead; no, it does not make any sense.”

Grade: F

Positives: Well-directed, interesting premise, solid acting.

Negatives: Moves too slowly, not creepy enough, not “believable” enough.

It’s about a man slowly going insane, his friend, and how it affects them both.

It gets more creepy and interesting as it goes along…slowly…at first.

Then, it plateaus with everything pretty much “laid out” for you. And it stays there. Until the end. Which is disappointing.

Too clinical, too step-by-step analytical, and not enough SCARY AS HELL.

Think Jack Nicholson from ‘The Shining’. The typing scene. That…is scary. REALLY creepy, convincing GOING CRAZY.

TAP…TAPTAP…TAPTAPTAP…TAPTAP…

This is not. It’s like it was made from the viewpoint of someone who had read a dozen books on severe mental illness, but never actually experienced anything close to it themselves.

Despite all that, its intent, the acting, the direction, the quality of it…make it interesting.

But don’t expect to be scared. Just…intrigued.

Cute moment: GHOST WARS

Grade: C-

Zomromcom about a boy who loves a girl so much that he comes back from the dead to fulfill his dream of taking her to the prom.

It’s totally deadpan: there’s no “horror”, because the tone just never allows for that.

It’s more like a typical high school “loser slowly wins over the most popular girl from the dumb jock with his sincerity” movie, except that the plot twists impacting the relationship (the focus of the film) are due to things like body parts falling off and a growing appetite for human flesh. You know, no big whoop.

The lead is very even-keeled despite his zombiehood, and doesn’t understand when other people are mildly confused by his return (that’s about as strong a reaction as he gets at first…maybe that’s a joke on how noone really paid attention to him when he was alive anyway).

His parents are blissfully ignorant of the fact that he’s come back from the dead in a “oh, hi, welcome back” everything-is-fine 50’s ‘Date With The Family’ sort of way. His mother stays just as pleasant as she adapts to his new appetite; like the rest of the movie, it’s amusing/interesting at first, but eventually runs out of ideas and “surprises” and becomes mostly just silly.

It does stay at least mildly interesting until right near the end, though, so it’s worth a watch. The ending is rather weak, but tolerable.

Inspirational Quote: “I was at the mortuary; they’re practically *giving* them away.”

Grade: C

The scariest thing about this movie is that, in researching it a bit, I found out that one of the things at the top of David Cronenberg’s wish list was/(is?) to work with Burt Reynolds. And NOT in a mockumentary.

The overall idea is interesting and the movie is disturbing – like most of Cronenberg’s work, I think – but despite some inherently disturbing scenes it’s decidedly un-scary; it seems like the idea was conceived well enough and then just written very poorly.

The doctor’s brief escape from the perilous pool scene reminded me a bit of Galahad’s just-in-time rescue from the Castle Anthrax.

Suggested dialogue upgrade (this did come out at around the same time, so it could have been L.F. Dibleyed):

(Doctor) *internal dialogue* “At this time I felt I was in great peril; however, something inside me insisted that I go back, and face the peril, even if perhaps it would be too perilous.”

OMG what a horrific, terrifying ending…(besides the rotten sax solo, I mean): Not since Ed Wood’s classic ‘The Violent Years’ couple-in-a-car scene has the male population of the world felt so incredibly threatened as by the second car leaving the garage.

In other news, this shows that you CAN, in fact, improve as a writer/director/filmmaker. Because, unlike some of Cronenberg’s later works, this sucks big-time.

Generous grade provided by the idea itself and a few halfway-decent scenes. And so as not to offend my Canadian readers.

Grade: D-

So let me get this straight…

An alien organism possessing (supposed) intelligence, that spreads and “infects” a THOUSAND times easier (even ACCIDENTALLY) than, I don’t know, let’s say…human-sized seed pods that take hours to function after being smuggled into your basement…and the ONE group they fail to target/infect is by easy definition one of – if not – THE most dangerous threat(s) to their assimilation aspirations?

I was gonna give it a D- for competence, a few mildly interesting scenes, and a nice little car-smothering chase. But when it didn’t go for the obvious, cliche (but competent and believable) ending, and instead chose the WTF, dumba$$, there’s no fcken way that would happen one, it lost even that.

There is nothing here that is not either:
– Totally predictable, OR
– Totally annoying in crushing any (almost-guaranteed superior) ideas you might have for it.

Try either of the ‘Body Snatchers’ movies (original or 70’s remake), ‘The Puppet Masters’ (borderline, but still), or anything else but this if you want the genre.

Great missed casting opportunities as extras: Keanu Reeves, Christian Bale, Nic Cage.

Inspirational Quote: “Yeah, we’re here. You wouldn’t believe this place, man; so much Nobel gold here you’d think you’re in Fort Knox…”

Grade: F

A mildly interesting opening take on the old (zombie) idea.

Unfortunately, all the slick direction and loud noises can’t mask the fact that the acting is either over- or mediocre.

The characters are mostly undefined, and the movie seems to say “oh, fck it” after a brief attempt at inspiration, content to devolve into the usual.

It picks up a little near the end, with a couple of interesting moments; but it’s still strictly for the zombie-movie-obsessed, and only if you must.

Grade: D-

After ‘Shaquille O’Neal: Comedy’, you might want something to make you laugh.

So there’s this. It’s a zombie/undead/infected/etc movie (remake).

It’s so over-the-top you might laugh at it. But more likely you’ll just stop watching it.

Or, if you keep watching it, more likely you’ll just be testing your endurance of how shockingly, free-stylingly-because-some-of-it-could-NOT-have-been-writtenly bad it will get.

Grade: F-

Saw this a LONG time ago; remembered it as creepy, funny, and really weird. Now, was this my relative youth, or is this a little gem of a movie? Let’s see…

Great little intro speech by the lead; really shows both how little he gives a fck and how good he is AT not giving a fck and being as coldly ruthless as seems possible.

He’s pretty clever and he KNOWS he’s pretty clever, methodically and without hesitation wielding that cleverness without a single (not second, not FIRST) thought about anything besides efficiency, exploitation, and profit.

He plays his role well, with decent supporting casters, as the movie quickly moves toward/into more and more absurd territory.

Clearly a comedy, as the man’s hatred of and aversion to boils and boil-on-the-botty talk is really over the top, and the music plays along well with fake “tension” amidst this horrible problem (yeah right).

The attempts at humor are rather tasteless and occasionally amusing, as the sometimes-sh1tty/sometimes-stupid “plot” and dialogue provide a few chuckles (or at least mild smiles). Played straight at all times, which is the key to it being worth anything at all (See ‘Dead Alive’).

Eventually the lead has a revelation/breakdown in which he realizes how evil all advertising is and tries to rid himself of all ties to it. At this time he also acquires a boil, which seems to grow and mutate rather as quickly as his personality changes.

He’s non-stop over-the-top and a ball of energy the entire movie: both as a cold, vicious weirdo and a concerned, reborn weirdo.

Unfortunately the whole thing runs out of steam about 2/3 of the way through. I mean, the setup moves along, the plot point, the boil’s formative years, etc…

But then, when what should be the conclusion (in some way) happens, it doesn’t end. It has a bit longer to go to make it movie-length, and so in true pre-revelation ad-man form the film is padded to go all the way, even as it gets less and less interesting and more and more stupid-boring, as opposed to ridiculous-amusing.

Worth a watch, though…at least for the first two-thirds, and to say you’ve watched it. It’s a fairly unique oddity, after all.

Inspirational Quote: “I’m an expert on t1ts. T1ts and peanut butter.”

Grade: C

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

There’s absolutely no reason to watch this movie.

The acting is decent, the writing is decent, the filming is decent.

The fx/makeup are mediocre at times; but even if they weren’t it wouldn’t change a thing.

The reason is because it’s totally redundant – there isn’t a thing here you haven’t seen before, as good or better.

Nothing surprising, no twists on the scenario, nothing exceptional.

In the context of that, the grade is wholly appropriate.

Competent and completely unnecessary. Re-watch one of your zombie favs instead.

Grade: D-

So. Back to zombie movies.

You know, seriously, this is actually sort of my contribution to society. I watch these, so that – for the most part – you don’t have to. Vis:

This is not a horror movie. It’s a comedy all the way.

The absurdity is RELENTLESS. I mean, joke after joke after joke parade on and by, some of the time lagging, some of the time the decent ones quickly covering for the bad ones. Twenty minutes in I actually laughed; it was eye-opening.

That’s after a weak, trying-too-hard-to-be-clever intro that made me think the whole thing would be the same. Fortunately, it actually GETS clever after it warms up, STAYS clever (at points, I emphasize…it’s spotty), and maintains a certain level of “quality” before fading near the end. Never revelatory, but it DOES have good points.

It’s only 1:24, so I guess the padding was necessary…but let’s just say you’re not missing anything at the end. You’re really not missing anything anywhere; in the sense that, wherever you start watching, it makes as much sense. And it means as much. And the jokes fly rat-tat-tat-tat as much, til about an hour in.

So I’d say start from about 12 minutes in (after reading the short description of the movie, which pretty much says all you need to know) and watch for as long as you like; if you like it by 20-25 minutes in, great. If not, you’ll never like it.

After an hour or so just stop watching, unless you’re either REALLY into it, drunk, or you’ve fallen asleep.

Here’s a note I took that I just HAD to put somewhere:

– A pretty good Ben Affleck imitation does a surprise Stuart Smalley imitation.

Inspirational Grammar: “Your/You’re”

Grade: D+

4/5/17: I find myself won over by Deb’s cute n’ SASSY-ness. But yeah, it runs out of steam somewhere around the “family” scene. The rest is simply tolerable, but hey…a guilty pleasure zomromcom. Grade: C-

7/14/18: The Great Grade Update. Nothing I enjoy this much (a certain amount) should be ranked “Below Average”. Grade: C

In 50 years or so – if not sooner – the intro to these short films will be about as scary as your average cheezy 60’s horror movie poster/intro/movie is today.

When the axe drops in the intro: HAIKIBA!

But on with the review:

A woman tries to turn the tables on a psycho, with varying degrees of success; her methods are explained in flashbacks.

Interesting premise. Interesting advice.

But it doesn’t progress much from said premise, so there’s really little point in watching.

I mean, the intro…the flashbacks, the initial “chase”, the endless story possibilities provided…at a certain point they just collapse, and you’re left with nothing except some disturbing images and an incredibly weak and unconvincing ending.

Grade: D-

Disney makes singing tolerable by the assurance that their movies very probably – at least – don’t stink.

This isn’t a Disney movie, and I’m not a big enough fan of Depp/Burton to plow through it.

Supposedly it’s really good, and if you’re a Depp/Burton fan you’re probably gonna see it no matter what, just like any other Depp/Burton/(sometimes)Elfman movie.

But I really couldn’t care less.

Grade: Incomplete

Louis don’t need no stinkin’ intro.

He’s 47, he’s got a big belly, he’s relaxed and…having fun?

And he’s still funny. Some laughs, yeah!

The only question I have is: did he WRITE “I don’t give a fck, here’s some jokes” or is it a real thing?

Because he doesn’t give a fck, here’s some jokes.

Highlights:
dead baby on demand
forklift n-word
life advice
girl-rat orgasms

Lowlight:
voices

Inspirational Quote: “Don’t worry, baby, you’re *definitely* gonna die.”

Grade: B-

This is a generic infected film, with a dash of drama.

Generic infected film – generic infected stuff.

Drama – mother “rescues” her daughter (or tries to, at least).

I *have* to watch these…that’s my thing.

You don’t…so don’t.

Worthless cr@p.

Grade: F

So Adolf Hitler awakens in Germany in 2015.

How can this be boring?

Grade: D-

‘Saw 0.2’ (That is NOT a recommendation).

I was in a really sh1t mood.

John Heard gets his money and runs…i wonder if that was actually how he was paid, and if that was what he had to drink to agree to be in this?

Now, the main evil guy…was it in the script for him to lazily eat nuts on some guy’s office sofa or was it his “inspired” improv? “…hey! If I ate nuts on this guy’s sofa, I’d look really creepy and it’d be like, foreshadowing and stuff!”

Way too many eye and head adjustments, way too many (uninspired) voice adjustments.

When did they create a combo-clone of Buckwheat and Snoop Dogg?

Why did I have a feeling the quasi-goth chick would be the nastiest contestant?

Is anyone still reading this?

Was any of the … “philosophy” in this supposed to be actual, coherent philosophy? Acknowledging that everyone has a Light side and a Dark side, and accepting that as part of human nature…the truly Evil here, as in life, are those that initiate evil acts, not those who are forced to respond to them.

It’s a close call which is better written and acted; this, or the Chris Farley “Japanese Game Show” sketch from SNL.

And if you’re waiting for a “twist”…it ain’t worth it.

There’s a parade of IQ’s to choose from, but I think one of the best is “Undeniably suspenseful” from the front cover. I mean, they’ll admit that there’s a certain basic level of suspense, but they don’t sound too happy about it.

Inspirational Quote: “…gonna have to, take one for the team.”

Grade: F

According to some, this is the worst movie ever made.

Eh…I’ve seen worse.

I mean, this is BAD, sure. It’s terrible. But I don’t see how it’s all that much more or less terrible than any other terrible Ed Wood movie (which would be all of them).

Absent an MST3K version to review, I’ll just say that if you want to see some great moments in the history of wretched acting, you might wanna give this a look-see. Also in the history of wretched screenwriting, and (of course) the history of wretched directing.

Ed Wood seems to give all the actors here the freedom to act, or not act, as they see fit. Some of them try for the most part…some of them are wooden for the most part…and some of them seem to just not give a sh1t, for the most part.

For the ones that try, but are kept in sh1t-land by Wood’s horrendous (fill in the blank), I think this is somewhat applicable, referring to each one of them:

“…who delivers the inane Con III lyrics with prissy expertise…”

and for those of you confused by what exactly THAT means, the following:

“‘Captain Hauk sucks the sweat off of a dead mans balls.’ I have no idea what that means, but it seems very negative to me.”

Eddie-baby seems to have absolutely no demand from his actors other than “utter your lines in any manner.”

I mean, I could ask a lot of hypothetical WTF questions, or point out every nuance that’s wrong…but what’s the point, really?

It’s just a BAD movie. A really, really BAD movie. I see very little to mark this as THE terrible Ed Wood movie…ALL Ed Wood’s movies are pretty d@mn terrible.

I think it’s worth a watch for the usual laughably-stupid lines that were SUPPOSED to be utterly serious.

Like other Ed Wood movies, you can’t really make these anymore; so there’s a certain museum-worthy charm to its own particular brand of horrible.

Inspirational Quote: “Yeah, sorta spooky-like.”

Grade: D-

Ok, so…did this come out in conjunction with ‘The Cabin In The Woods’ to show just how accurate a satire that is?

Ummm…no, it came out both before AND after. Got it.

This is “before”…let’s see…

Two girls and three guys – check
Going to a cabin in the woods to party – check
A “Harbinger”-type character – check
Characters acting like complete morons – check
“The Athlete” – check
“The Fool” – the same as the athlete, actually…
“The Virgin” – check, close enough
“The Whore” – check, close enough…personally, I blame-
“The Scholar” – check, close enough

and, of course:
“The Vaguely-Disturbing Scandinavian Guy” – check

No surprises.

Grade: D-

Some of the grossness of the already-bad original without any of the suspense.

Utterly pointless.

Grade: F

All ready to enter the appropriate dismissive-as-hell review – and I still will – when something vaguely clever happens.

Ok, so this girl is sort of infected/crazy, and this guy chops her hand off. And she looks at it, apparently not in pain but really surprised, and is like (very appropriately, I think) “WTF???” and then when she turns suddenly, the stump that’s left of her arm gets blood on the camera. Ummm…I assume this is dark humor, sort of like Monty Python’s Sam Peckinpah’s ‘Salad Days’.

But then…there’s really no other moments like that. Or if there were, they were instantly forgettable. So I give you the following, and hooray to whoever that girl was for upping this grade slightly; I mean, that was deadpan good.

(Minor Research: No, it wasn’t Dylan Penn).

The damage done by George A. Romero is well-documented and undeniable.

Here Darren Aronofsky takes his turn, inspiring someone to make a sh1t movie with lots of “dream” sequences and QUICK CUTS.

And green goop, and gore, and that’s about it.

To sum up, it’s EXACTLY like ‘Requiem For A Dream’, except it has infected people, it has no talent, and it sucks donkey balls.

It actually gets started – the gore/goop/infected stuff – about two-thirds of the way through.

Gotta say, lots of great pipe footage though.

Suggested Propaganda Quote-Lift: “…it’s EXACTLY like ‘Requiem For A Dream…'”

Inspirational Quote: “What the Fck?”

Grade: F

No mediocre, dumb-a$$ CGI was harmed in the making of this film.

Cheeze Quotient: Not Enough. Well…maybe the lions.

Someone on IMDB gave this 10 stars.

Come to me for your reviews.

Grade: F

GZM (Generic Zombie Movie)

I feel sort of like a doctor: I don’t WANT people to be sick, of course…but if sick people didn’t exist, what the heck would I do?

Tha’s my bread an buttah, man!

I mean, eventually people HAVE to get sick of zombies/infected.
And on that day, I don’t know whether I’ll lament, rejoice, or both.

One thing I empathize with the cast on: the ending shot is beautiful.

Grade: F

It’s about how kids have really bad taste in television, and watching too much of it is NOT good for you.

OR

It’s about “infected” hunters that (OMG/OMLG!) find infected.

Either way, there isn’t a single flicker of life in any of the predictable scenes, shapeless characters, or horrible lines.

Incredibly boring. So generic you can’t laugh at it, which would be the only redeeming thing about it.

Time spent watching movie and writing review to make sure YOU DON’T WATCH IT: about two hours.

Grade: F-

Goodness knows it’s not that I can’t enjoy an old movie.

I understand that FX stunk in 1958. I understand that things were different in 1958. I understand that horror films had to have obligatory EXCITING! opening music in 1958.

But I saw a movie released in 1956 called ‘Invasion Of The Body Snatchers’ that was pretty darn good (I think I under-rated it, actually…oops).

The difference between ‘Invasion’ and this?

‘Invasion’ takes a great idea and plays it out well using decent acting, directing, and writing.

This takes a great idea and plays it out badly using wooden acting (except for Patricia Owens, the female lead), and poor directing.

Owens is working by herself most of the time, surrounded by puppets and cliches, and that’s how she looks.

I mean…at the end, when they’re walking away from the camera, the boy LIFTS HIS FOOT AWKWARDLY OVER a croquet hoop, instead of, you know…breaking the “perfect” symmetry of the departing line by stepping slightly to the side, just to keep the “perfect ending” in place.

No need to re-take that.

We’ve come full-circle. In 1986, this was remade to salvage a great idea with: good acting, a much better script, and better directing. The FX are improved too, of course…but that’s not what makes it a good film.

Now, we’re remaking films from about thirty years ago and making them suck with slick, robotic acting and bad scripts; hoping that the GREAT FX and all the AMAZING visuals will hide the fact that they suck.

About 54 minutes in: “Perhaps booze would alleviate this situation…”

A short time later: “This house has sho gone crazy!”

Upped a notch for inspiring the 1986 remake.

Grade: D

4/21/16: Instant re-review – I loved it. Much better than ‘Cats’. I’m going to watch it again and again.

Director David Cronenberg is linked to “body horror” films.

The thing is, unlike almost every other director linked to those, he has talent beyond camp cr@p and gore sh1t.

I did a little research (yeah, really!) and the general consensus is that Jeff Goldblum is great in this. I agree.

The way he portrays protagonist Seth Brundle – giving him a personality complete with quirks and mannerisms and an awkward sort of charm – makes you buy the character, and care about him. Always important in a lead, but especially here, where caring about Brundle is absolutely essential in having any interest in the film.

Unless, of course, you just enjoy seeing great creepy make-up and disturbing images. In that case, you may find some things here perplexing, so allow me to explain: the thing that operates throughout the film is called a “script”, the entities with real personalities are called “characters”, and the way in which the whole thing is portrayed is called “intelligence”.

Geena Davis is good as Brundle’s foil and love interest, but quite frankly Goldblum is so good as Brundle that she’s not even necessary: this could be a one-man show in Brundle’s unfashionable “home”/laboratory and it would still be interesting.

Goldblum is so sympathetic that even when he’s morphing he retains more humanity (and personality) than most probably would. And he plays each stage just as well as the original Brundle character, which, again, makes the transformation believable. And, since you care about Brundle, disturbing and creepy.

Again, if you’re just watching for the creepy makeup and images, an explanation: “humanity” in the manner I mean constitutes aspects of compassion, humor, sympathy, kindness, loyalty, self-sacrifice, and so on. Some people tend to look for that in characters, so they can have sympathy for them. If you still don’t understand, see Wiktionary entry “sympathy”.

The whole idea here is creepy, the mood is creepy, Goldblum himself (even as unassuming original-Brundle) has a tinge of creepiness mixed into his appearance and attitude, and the transformation happens slowly enough (and is portrayed convincingly enough, mentally as well as physically) to string that creepiness out over almost the entire movie.

The FX are 30 years old, so come on…it’s gonna be a LITTLE cheezy at times. And there are bits that seem disjointed, or unnecessary.

But I think it’s creepy as HELL.

Inspirational Quote: “Have you ever heard of insect politics?…Neither have I.”

Grade: B

Cheezy; yes, of course.

But somewhat enjoyable, especially near the beginning.

…but not near the end, when it gets generic, and AT the end, when it gets really generic, cliche, stupid, and mildly anti-climactic. Then again, to expect much from a King-adapted novel is not logical.

Inspirational Quote: “God I hate rock n’ roll.”

Grade: D

Good: Jones

Pretty good: Snipes, Downey

Indifferent: Most of the rest

Really bad: The wig

If this came out by itself, on its own, it would be seen as a somewhat generic but decent chase/suspense/thriller/whodunit with a pretty good cast and a certain amount of intelligence.

As ‘The Fugitive 2’ it’s a huge disappointment.

So…if you’re gonna compare, don’t bother watching.

Without Harrison Ford, the focus shifts from “THE Fugitive” to “a fugitive”; Wesley Snipes is pretty good but he’s not Ford, and he can’t carry the movie.

The writer or writers probably realize this, which is why this is much less Snipes-centric than ‘The Fugitive’ was Ford-centric.

The addition of Robert Downey Jr helps, the lines are spread out more among Jones’ crew, and it becomes much more about the chase/suspense/thriller/whodunit aspect than the rooting-for-a-likeable-character aspect.

If you like TL Jones’ character and crew, give it a watch. If not, skip it.

Grade: C

Like ‘Thinner’ (and ‘The Arrival’, and ‘The Rock’, and ‘The Puppet Masters’…) in that it isn’t all THAT good, but I have watched it several times and enjoyed it. Just somethin’ about it…I don’t know…

Basically it’s a satire on boxing, corruption, and racism.

It’s got an “ensemble cast” (the best way to describe a bunch of actors you know from when they WERE good and/or have always been B List) as well as Samuel L. Jackson (You’ll guess who he’s supposed to be in about 2 seconds), Jamie Foxx (who is quite good in a small role), Damon Wayans (who is kinda grumpy), and some guy named Peter Berg as the white heavyweight (who may have never appeared in a major movie before or since, but is actually good in this).

The show so far:

Yes, the, uh, show so far. Well…there’s two black boxers, and one of them wins. Then there’s a group that wants more money, and they want to get a white challenger. Then they get the white challenger, and white people love him. Then he becomes well-trained enough to give a sliver of hope (or fear, depending) he might win. Then they fight. Ding.

Grade: C

WARNING: Do not let the initial promise of this film convince you to watch the rest. I can’t say it’s all set-up and then nothing, but it is a lot of set-up for a very disappointing, badly written ending.

It’s a cast of four on one set interacting.  Fine, but if it’s character-driven it has to be better acted and if it’s plot-driven then there has to be more plot and the ending can’t suck.

Watched to completion only by people that don’t know they’re in for a “WTF???” at the end.  Be my guest.

Grade: D-

A very low-budget-looking horror/comedy.

Nowhere near as ridiculously gory as ‘Dead Alive’, but almost as deadpan tasteless – and good for stupid cool catchphrases.

It’s also not very disturbing, since it’s so unbelievably unbelievable. Beyond the obvious movie reference, it reminded me of what ‘The Brain That Wouldn’t Die’ (a much more creepy, sinister film MST3K’Od) might have been like if they hadn’t tried.

Also makes me think of Queen. No, that’s not Freddie Mercury, though the premise of the movie suggests that it MIGHT be.

Inspirational Quote: “You want a sandwich?”

Grade: C

Part one (boot camp) is a great, compelling, disturbing short film. R. Lee Ermey is brilliant, and Vincent D’Onofrio’s Private Pyle is a real character: you see him, flaws and all, trying his best but in way over his head. And you can tell from the beginning that there’s something slightly wrong with him…D’Onofrio portrays his descent well, up to and including the ending, which comes too soon.

Part two (off to Vietnam) is a collection of scenes and lines that seem thrown together to make the film long enough – like they came up with interesting individual bits of dialogue and then had to write actual scenes around them, which don’t feel connected. The fact that the characters don’t seem at all real anymore makes it a bit difficult to give a fck, too.

Same as I remembered it: two movies; one great, one ok.

Inspirational Quote: “I AM…in a world…of SH1T.”

Grade: B-

The only good thing about this collection of caricatures, cardboard cutouts, meaningless SFX, and convenient and mediocre plot devices is young James T. Kirk, convincing both in action and in emotion.

Translated: He’s a decent actor and he was written well.

The attempt to unite the ST:TOS crowd behind this is far less convincing than the attempt to do so in ‘Generations’.

And that’s no insult to the memory of Leonard Nimoy…it’s a compliment, if anything. HIS Spock was, by far, the most interesting character of the TOS crew. It seems beneath him to favor this tripe with an appearance.

And fictional “Timeline” fans, please explain this minor inconsistency from TOS:

“Mr. Spock: Vulcan has not been conquered within its collective memory. The memory goes back so far that no Vulcan can conceive of a conqueror. I knew the ship was lost because I sensed it.

Capt. Kirk: What was it you sensed?

Mr. Spock: Touch of death.

Capt. Kirk: And what do you think they felt?

Mr. Spock: Astonishment.”

Grade: D-

1/19/16: Alternate Timeline: Plot device used by lazy writers who either don’t care about old material or don’t like to do enough research to make an existing timeline actually cohere with new material.

8/3/16: Fine, it’s not terrible. But BESIDES Kirk and all permutations thereof (the car, the bar fight, Uhura catching him with her roommate, the REALLY COOL apple reference…) it’s just generic. Fine-tuned mediocrity, not boding well for the future since NONE of the characters seem real, besides Kirk. He hates to lose… Grade: D+

“2” was “1”, only without the slightest attempt at a script. Look to 1 for the grade, and try to imagine it lower.

This, on the other hand, is thoroughly disgusting but less shocking than either 1 or 2…the gore is expected (and less), the end result is pre-decided.

If you have the stomach for it (really) and like wretched (I mean REALLY), you might enjoy this slightly as camp: the greatest achievement of the director, an MST3K-after-hours worthy film.

Inspirational Quote: “That B-movie sh1t??”

Grade: D-

I watched this yesterday and after running out of sh1t to do today I’m finally reviewing it, because it’s “zombie”.  I think that’s enough.

Grade: D-

I DON’T understand…AT ALL…WHY, for the love of Cthulhu, there haven’t been ANY good film adaptations of Lovecraft’s work (that I’ve seen) beyond ‘In The Mouth Of Madness’.

Surely the source material is good enough, and imaginative enough, and creepy enough…for SOMEONE to take those ideas and transform them into a movie that’s somewhat worthy of the source.

But ITMOM is the only success I’ve seen.

And, while I applaud the appreciation of the material that this film (and some others) show(s), it is “well-intentioned”; like everything except ITMOM, a regretful if (in some cases) sincere failure.

Grade: F

AKA ‘The Gates Of Hell’

Sh1tty Italian zombie flick.

Lots of eyeball close-ups.

21:16 – The endangered-crotch guy from ‘The Dead Talk Back’ could have finally made a sale.

58:28 – The BBC should have put ‘Gardening Club’ here.

Question: Why does Dunwich occasionally turn into a jungle?

Grade: F-

Guest Review:

“How could any man do such monstrous things?”
“Mr. Dante??”

Grade: F

Lots of ACTION, sfx, and attempts to be cool.

The action and sfx are somewhat impressive but mostly pointless; there to distract attention from a really mediocre script.

The attempts to be cool succeed very rarely.

Basically the only REALLY interesting thing about this movie is The Zombie Whisperer, which comes in the last third and is still contaminated by the other three.

Please adjust the grade upward relative to how much of a moron you are.

Grade: D

Mediocre drama about three people with a few zombies.

A precision display of unnecessary film-making.

Grade: D-

Yes, a movie review!

I had to, it’s “zombie”.

Anyhoo…

Yes, it’s that bad.

No, it’s not good-bad.

Grade: F