Category: Movie/Long Subject Reviews

I was afraid to watch this again.  The first time (a LONG time ago) I really liked it, and I was quite concerned that it would be a huge disappointment now, for some nagging reason…

It wasn’t a huge disappointment.  But that’s mostly because I went in expecting it to be a huge disappointment, and it was ok.

The script is…ok.

The acting is decent, not great…Kline probably being the best.

The “drama” attempts fall short, and while it has some amusing moments certainly, it’s rarely “funny”.

Definitely dated.

Off NF Streaming 6/1/14.

Grade: D+

A documentary on the making of ‘Night Of The Living Dead’, with four sources of info: George Romero himself (dun dun DUN!), a voiceover guy and stock footage (Oh, the pretension…), various voices talking over scenes/stills of the movie itself, and lastly (and leastly) some “experts” giving their opinions on various subjects (OHHH, the pretension).

Before proceeding further let me be clear: this is a DOCUMENTARY.  It’s not a ‘Dead’ movie.  It’s not about a new ‘Dead’ movie.  There is NOTHING new here in terms of actual “movie”.  So if you’re looking for that, stop right here and look someplace else.

If you’re up for a ‘Night’ documentary, this is in some ways unique (quotes, stills) and in some ways lacking; leaving out important behind-the-scenes bits that I’ve seen in other documentaries on the subject.

If you think you might be up for it, here goes…

The Sources:

1: Romero – talks about himself, talks about the making, talks about the travails, makes some jokes, laughs, grins, smiles, rakes in the dough.  Hell, I’d be smiling.  “Screw you, copyright laws!” he may well have been thinking.  He also confirms some theories:
-The ending was, from the beginning of the script, intentionally as dark as possible – something they fought to keep, actually.
-The cause of the “zombies” is never given on purpose (I believe George could have concocted something solid if he really wanted to): “God changed the rules, no more room in Hell…” or whatever else you can think of.
-By what he says AND doesn’t say: there was no Vietnam message, no civil rights message, etc etc etc…(see the IQ below for George’s overall take on making the film).  The closest he comes to validating any of these (or any other) theories is to acknowledge that the fictional inspiration for ‘Night’ was about “revolution”. 

From his own commentary, he may have used little bits here and there of what he saw/heard/experienced of the times, but only in the same way that he used the already-dented car: it was there (physically or in his head), so it came out. 

According to Romero’s own words, they DO NOT explore the “racial issue” AT ALL…the script remains as it is despite the concerns of  (you guessed it) Duane Jones. 

A black man as a hero is great, and Duane Jones is a real actor…and the retroactive commentary is fun to think about/look at…but Romero didn’t cast Jones because he was black.  He wasn’t making a message.  He was hiring an actor.  So let’s not turn this into some great, brave revelation by Romero.  It simply was as it happened.

2: Voiceover guy and stock footage – lots of commentary about the 60’s, the civil rights movement, riots, unrest, violence, politics, Vietnam…none of which, I believe, had anything to do with ‘Night’.  I mean, was Romero AWARE of these events?  Sure.  Did they inspire him to make a movie?  Did they have ANYTHING to do with the movie?  No.  He just wanted to make a flippin’ movie.  Again, see the IQ below.  Trudging through this is often painful since it’s so obviously cr@p and it’s not even NEW cr@p…I’ve heard most of it before.

3: Various voices + scenes/stills – Often interesting, mostly because of the movie supplying the footage, but occasionally due to some commentary that rises above mediocre/redundant (usually from George).  Unfortunately it doesn’t seem to be able to decide on whether it wants to be THIS (an actual analysis of creation/scenes/etc) or an over-analysis of extremely debatable “motivations”/”themes”/”messages”…ultimately the latter wins out, which is too bad.

4: The only names I recall are Fessenden and Ebert, because everything else was just so unremarkable.  You’ve got George himself talking about it…who the fck cares what some random unrelated guy THINKS George was “trying to say”?  You’ve got the man himself there.  And the man himself seems to say, for the most part, “I was just trying to make a horror film”.  But for the good and the bad:
– Larry Fessenden tries to cast the movie as a willful defiance of Hollywood as a form of “critique” of “Hollywood” films…but that’s bullsh1t.  Romero shot it on a really worn shoestring because he
HAD to, not cuz he would have minded getting a few thousand from “mainstream cinema”.  So Fessenden stars as the guy that gets the most pretentious about the whole thing.
– As Roger Ebert (among others) attested to, and is quoted rather hauntingly around 1:02:00 as saying, this was NOT your typical B-grade 60’s cheezy “horror” flick – something which children found out rather painfully after going in expecting to see one.  His quote, as per usual with him and R.C., says it better than I ever could.

Other notes: Some good background info on the many contributors to the film that you may not have seen/heard/known before, some interesting little factoids in general, a completely unexplainable venture into Sidney Poitier films that makes me think they needed to pad out the length or were just REALLY stretching the whole (non-existent, IMPO) “civil rights” angle to the film, and LOTS and LOTS of over-analysis.

I think Romero himself summed up ‘Night’ and dismissed all the brouhaha surrounding it simultaneously with the best line of the doc.

Inspirational Quote: “It was no big thing, man.”

Grade: D

Three Asian (Korean) short films: one “zombie” and then two artsy.

If you’re not in the mood to have (at least attempted) deeeeeep thoughts presented for your analysis/approval/disapproval/mockery, best to steer clear.

But generally not being a fan of pretentious artsy cr@p, I find the second and third films somewhat interesting and worth a view.  I don’t think they’re as “deep” as they want to be, but they don’t annoy me and they do, to an extent, intrigue me.

First: Zombie-ish outbreak film.  A few darkly humorous touches, otherwise totally generic at best and terrible (in dialogue and acting) at worst.  And more the latter.

Second: A robot appears to have achieved “Consciousness” – a sense of identity and a pattern of “thought” beyond what was programmed into it.  Some revere it, some want it destroyed.

The dialogue and acting are generally decent, and it’s at least somewhat thought-provoking; with a definite Buddhist leaning to its philosophizing.  Parts are dull, but parts are interesting…and I was surprised and pleased (quality-wise) by the ending.

Third: After an online order, everyone prepares for the end of the world via a meteor collision.  Like the first, a few darkly humorous touches…more, probably; and better.  More in line with
the second in terms of the acting and dialogue being relatively decent.  A hell of a lot better than ‘Melancholia’, and less fcken gloomy.

Grade: D+

Attempt to cash in on the current (then; hopefully fading) undead craze (mostly zombies, but still).

Tries to be a witty dark comedy, a drama, and an action film.

Fails at the first except for a couple of (brief) moments and completely (and somewhat embarrassingly) fails at the second.

As for action, it’s just boring since the movie is so completely and utterly shallow that you don’t care at all about any of the “characters”.

I had little hope to start, and never gained any.

Inspirational Quote: “I look like a dead hooker!”

Grade: F

The opening is cheezy and grandiose, and just plain bad.

And, for the most part, so is the rest of the movie.

I could (and did) write a page of notes on its flaws, but in editing mode they have been whittled down (and tidied up).

The positives: Gary Oldman (good and creepy as usual) as Dracula and Anthony Hopkins (just as good) as Van Helsing.  And some guy I don’t recognize as Renfield, though his part is small.

The negatives: Every single thing Keanu Reeves says and does (the accent is laughable and the acting follows suit), Winona Ryder (not nearly as bad but still mediocre and unconvincing), often cheezy FX, bordering-on-silly grandiosity, and parts of the script which even Oldman can’t save.

On a more visceral (my new favorite word) note, I find myself feeling sympathy for Oldman’s Dracula (as is intended) because his love is true, as he demonstrates at several points; and also because of the very real sense of doom he must exist with.

Van Helsing draws my sympathies from discipline, bravery, and (most importantly by far) the belief that he does what he does because he believes and cares, not because he enjoys.  Hopkins’ acting makes this clear well before the quote below does so.

Other notes: 40 minutes in my only real hope was that Hopkins would save it…Dracula’s come-on to Ryder hovers just above Torgo-ish in nature.

There are a few moving moments in the movie, but overall the intended majestic gestures are an exercise in “gothic” pomposity.

Without Hopkins, indeed, I would find it virtually unwatchable.

Inspirational Quote: “He was in life a most remarkable man, and his mind was great and powerful…but greater is the necessity to stamp him out and destroy him utterly.”

Grade: D

Some decently acted family interaction leads off, broken up only by a vaguely odd visitor plot point.

Fairly quickly turns into the female lead vs. weird/unexplained events as the other characters are absent for a long stretch of house-creeping, with the camerawork as ragged as her emotional state.

But it’s basically just consistent suspense/spookiness and very little else – broken briefly by what seems a silly fx moment getting near the end.  There’s no unexpected (and necessary) “payoff” to all the creeping about.

The lead is fairly convincing, but there’s so little to the movie that it’s really not enough.  The ending certainly isn’t worth it.

Grade: D-

Love the intro.

To sum up without giving away, it’s about cannibalism and a mythology of “gaining another’s” strength through it.  It’s also about morality vs. self-preservation and decadence.

First act: a bit creepy (moreso as it nears the end), and darkly humorous at points (in line with the intro, but under rather adverse conditions).  It works fairly well, for me at least; the creepiness
and dark humor mesh together and don’t cancel each other out at all.  Even the music and camerawork seem to be in on it.

Personally I think the first act goes on a little bit too long – it’s setup, I welcome and understand, but perhaps a bit too much of it at a bit too slow of a pace.

Then a foreboding interlude after the very important plot point.

Second act: the humor fades (with a brief return near the end) and it becomes, for the most part, a dark drama.  Much more consistently tense and creepy, somewhat philosophical, more thought-provoking, and more compelling in general.

The ending is decent in more ways than one.

I particularly like the way in which the film portrays those who dismiss morality and quote against it as a “weakness” as being themselves weak, unable to keep in check the most base impulses, slaves to their own dangerous yet pathetic ethos because they have become the embodiment of it, not because they believe in it.  For the most part, that is…there are always exceptions, rare though they may be.

Self-preservation is the opiate of the masses, as I am ultra fond of saying.

Grade: B-

An altered, “modern” take on Herman Melville’s short story.

It’s got David Paymer co-starring, if you care.

Weird and quirky right from the beginning; and while the supporting cast’s contributions are fine (decently acted) the draw is Bartleby (played by Crispin Glover) and Paymer’s boss character – their actions and interactions.

I find it promising from shortly in ’til the “punchline”…the delivery, the riddle answered, in the vein of ‘The Twilight Zone’.  DECENT, not great ‘Twilight Zone’, since while I found some enjoyment in the buildup I was a bit let down by the ending.

It does get a bit artsy, but I wasn’t put off by that in this case.  You, on the other hand, may think it’s a load of pretentious cr@p.  It’s really hard to say without watching.  I guess TZ is the closest thing I can think of to gauge your interest.  Or if you’ve read the short story.

Bad points: a little (totally out of place) slapstick, some dull moments, not as creepy as it could have been.

Inspirational Quote: “I would prefer not to.”

Grade: C-

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

The beginning shows the promise of a generic flight disaster film (zombies, infected, snakes, etc…) with predictable and eminently forgettable characters.

It turns out to be more of a bad Whodunit, with nothing of the zombie/infected/mystical/supernatural sort until about 20 minutes left.  And even then it’s pretty tedious.

A really old Mark Hamill gives it semi-star power, and makes me actually feel really sad for the guy.

Re: old Mark Hamill – the FX are not quite ‘Star Wars’ (the cheezy original) quality.

Great cinematic moment: Foreboding “complimentary drink” music.

Grade: F

Un-promising cartoon intro.

Then there’s a live-action continuation of some really questionable mythology and a car crash which leaves the lead somewhere between this world and the next (sort of like ‘The Crow’, face paint and all).

But that’s the only thing in common with ‘The Crow’.

This movie features a lead who isn’t a very good actor, a bunch of other people that aren’t very good actors, some really bad dialogue points, lots of weird but not very interesting scenes,
somewhat silly FX, and lots of rain. (Oops…two things).

I did not enjoy this at any point, and was quite thankful when it ended.  Recommended to lovers of pretentious, grandiose quasi-goth cinema.

Really bad ending, too.

Grade: F

Converting notes to review form:

The premise is interesting enough, sure…and the intro is decent.  I actually had my interest sparked a bit in both the subject and the competence level of the film.

But it goes nowhere.  It takes a premise and stretches it as far as possible in terms of “setup” and then just slowly dissolves into poorly acted, scripted, and directed insanity. Disappointing long before the end, but I hoped that at least the ending would be somewhat worth my trouble.  It wasn’t.

None of the players stand out acting-wise, so I don’t buy into any of them or their interactions/frictions, nor do I particularly care what happens to their characters.  Near the end I can sort of see why one of them goes insane (and it’s not abstract), but the acting of the others doesn’t convince me.

The first moment of foreboding (for my possible viewing enjoyment) comes with the first act of insanity, which isn’t slow…it’s just very, very stupid and completely unbelievable.

Features some EXTREMELY annoying noises…just as bad for the viewer as the cast.

Rips: ‘Pet Sematary’, ‘In The Mouth Of Madness’, and of course ‘The Blair Witch Project’; except the reactions aren’t real, the characters aren’t as believable, and it’s in no way original by the year 2010.  In fact, it’s been done to death, and this is a pointless and mostly worthless variation.

Featuring a motivational speech on neck-breaking.

Grade: F

10/3/15: Eh.  Upped a notch for mood/intro.  It still sucks.  Grade: D-

Not “found” films; “cheezily and laughably stolen” films.

The thieves have pretty bad taste, too.

First: Old puppeteer clings to his puppet obsession, conflicting with British lad and his mum.  Features a couple of extremely unnecessary in-out zooms, “Wayne’s World” style, and a really dumb chase.  Awfully bad.

Second: Quite dull until very close to the end, where a mildly interesting twist fails to save it.  Sadly, the best of the bunch.

Third: Sillier and sillier story about a house with a strange self-defense system based on garden gnomes and blinking lights.

The post-third ending is very short but terrible.

Grade: F

First half: Somewhat creepy, good makeup/fx for most interesting scene: no gore but fairly disturbing (see, it CAN be done!), acting/script seem a BIT wooden at times, fade…

Second half: Decent fx for not-so-key scenes, greater (same) problem with acting/script, somewhat less creepy, disappointing (and bad) ending.

The only part I’d ever want to watch again is the one first-half scene, which comes just before the second half and gives you a bit of false hope.

I mean it’s never AWFUL…but it’s a horror movie that veers towards dull far too often and is never light – a “serious” waste of time.

Grade: D-

Just found on NF streaming.

You’ve probably seen it already, but if you haven’t (or don’t remember) here’s a quick summary:

Roman General Maximus, after a decisive victory in Germania (which opens and is the best part of the movie, IMPO) is condemned to death by the Emperor’s son, who does not react well to being told he will not inherit his father’s position.  Maximus becomes a slave, and then works his way back to Rome, where the inevitable confrontation occurs.  Then there’s lots of drama before it occurs again.

Joaquin Phoenix is very good (and creepy and evil) as the son, but Russell Crowe is the star with a ferocious and emotionally convincing performance as Maximus.

Periods of tedium, periods of mediocrity, periods of moving excitement/epicness.

There are some really interesting/moving visuals – some grand and some tiny – mostly near and at the end.

I think it’s a little too long.

But, overall, a pretty good movie.

Inspirational Quote: “They say no.”

Grade: B-

An amazing archaeological discovery brings James Spader (Indiana Jones without the respect, personality, or ruggedness…or Evie without the charm and quirkiness) and Kurt Russell (a Kurt Russell character – Gruff variant) together to try to make sense and a movie out of it.

Turns out to be a portal, leading to a sci-fi-ish adventure.

I remembered it being somewhat interesting but ponderous, confusing, and ultimately unsatisfying.

Re-viewing: Pretty boring, actually.  Dull and often cliche.  The beginning isn’t too bad, but the farther it goes the worse it gets.

Grade: D-

The disappointing/unnecessary/ragged rough draft/precursor for ‘Desperado’.

Grade: D-

Phew, thank God…another “found footage” movie.  I was beginning to worry.

Starts off decently actually, as a WWII movie from the perspective of some Russian soldiers.

It builds up decently as well, with some signs of what’s to come.

Finally they run into the monstrous creations, which seem pretty small in number for an army.  But they are rather deadly.

After that it’s grossness, pauses, and intermittent poorly-filmed battles with often-silly monstrosities until a quick plot twist explaining the camera’s “necessity”.

It switches shortly thereafter to gross Dr. Frankenstein disgustingness (he’s not nearly as interesting as ‘Day Of The Dead”s version) as the unbelievable and fairly thin plot stretches to the end.

I admit, it was interesting enough (at least in potential/curiosity) to make me actually WANT to watch ’til Frankenstein appeared.  But after that it was just gross and fairly pointless, with several dialogue mistakes that I don’t believe were intentional, but which I HOPE the director left in because he didn’t care anymore either.

Grade: D

Hey, it’s Bob Solo.  Better not let him out of the car.

After seeing the opening caption I was ready, and sure enough…spotted at 22 minutes and change.  Recurring, yet.

This is not another ‘1313’ movie, despite the title.  I’ve learned my lesson well.

Watched mainly to test my memory from age 13-14 of it being good; part I remembered best from before: future ‘Shawshank’ guard getting the sh1t beaten out of him.

It’s a very dark movie, mostly prison-type scenes.  It’s also far too long…there’s a lot of dull/mediocre sh1t that should have been trimmed, especially in the second half.  But it holds up decently for the most part.

And yeah, it’s the long version, and yeah, it’s off NF streaming IMMINENTLY.

Grade: C

The opening ‘Scream’ parody is pretty good.

The rest is a mixed bag, with lots of unfunny parodies/jokes and a few other decent ones.

Other Favs: ‘Reservoir Dogs’ slow-walk mock, recurrent driving disaster memories, and a few other ultra-quick bits.

Near the end it gets REALLY dull, unfortunately…you can pretty much turn it off after the last driving flashback.

I reviewed it because it’s off NF streaming SOON, if you care.

Grade: D

NF streaming description incorrect.  It should read, IMPO: “After making out while drunk and depressed with some guy, he rapes her”.  Just to prepare those who are expecting a one-night-stand.

It should, IMPO, further read: “He gives her some horrific illness that slowly degenerates her body, life, morality, and sanity – in that order.  Near the end she goes psycho, destroys everyone she cares about, and then is VERY briefly an infected/zombie.  The End.”

I mean, that’s it…and there’s no point.  How is this so unlike ‘Jenifer’, then?  In ‘Jenifer’ there’s a choice.  And it’s fcken scary.  This is just: “you’re fcked, you’re gonna fck over everyone you know, then you’re gonna die.  There’s nothing you can do about it.”  And it’s not scary, just gross.

Basically this tries to appeal to the gross, nasty visuals crowd.  But if you want gross, nasty visuals there are SO many movies out there that are ALL gross, nasty visuals.  So this is pointless.

The acting is decent, so I can’t possibly give this an F.  But I’d really, really like to.

Grade: D-

6/23/18: I had a feeling this was better than I gave it credit for. And I was right, sort of. The female lead is convincing, and the grossness is … interesting. There’s precious little more, but it is interesting if you LIKE gross. Not “tolerate if there’s something more to it-gross”, but LIKE. The nasty-horrible-vicious-little side of me does sometimes. Oh, and there’s a very powerful anti-lesbian message here. Methinks the director doth get rejected too much. Grade: D

I really like the intro to this…nice flow of time to the pictures.

And the couple becomes likeable 10 mins in, when the husband shows a good sense of humor and some wit, and the wife shows (I think) faithfulness, cuteness, and obvious (I think) love.

Shortly after that the teapot arrives on scene.

I like the sorta-BDSM scene but that’s probably cuz the wife is hot.

I also like her well-worded vagina defense, which takes place during one of the last really interesting scenes (a mostly-vegan meal clash).

There ends the good portion of the review.  Because unlike how I expected this to go, it turns to (attempts at) humor and absurdity.  The humor is sometimes dark, but more often it’s medium: not light-hearted, but not good enough for dark either.  Luke-warm.

It’s just tedious after a while, the silly quality having destroyed any chance of emotional attachment or taking anything seriously…at least for me.

Eventually things end, probably as you expected them to after a certain point.

Great idea, decent start…WRONG direction.  This should have been a thriller, a creepy morality play.  Not a comedy.  Or it should have been a really funny comedy, which it wasn’t.

Grade: D

Quick review/advice: watch the first 35-40 and last 4-5 minutes.  Skip the other 80 or so.

My first impression was: French.  It’s artsy.  Competent but boring.

Then: Gets more clever, I can tell (I think) the messages it’s sending without being hit over the head with them, and I chuckle/smile a bit.  The way she finds a secret compartment is clever, especially after being led in a different direction.  Then it slowly meanders and starts to lose me until…

About 40 minutes in, I’d had enough.  And though I watched the rest of it, I really didn’t care.  It was drudgery and “Yeah, real clever.  Wonderful.  Oh, great…yeah.  How much time is left??”.

To explain, I would say that the clever bits either stopped being clever or COMPLETELY lost my interest because they were leading to dull/dumb things if they led anywhere at all.  The talking to the camera didn’t draw me in…thank God.  I didn’t wanna be in.  It was the same as the rest, no better or worse.  Equivalent, let’s say, for the sticklers, as opposed to equal.

Quite frankly I found Amelie herself more pretentious and weird than interesting.  Weird does NOT equal interesting.  The two are not intrinsically connected, although they certainly converge in many instances.  This, to me, is not one of them.  And despite all of her weirdness, I find her acts of inspiration rather stupid random chaos.

Her signature moves are smiling impishly, and letting others (including the narrator) talk for her.

I mean, I don’t buy it.  I don’t buy it at all.  Not one bit, not after :40:00.

I get the messages…like when she asks her father a deep question and he responds by saying something unrelated and dull, my interpretation is “they’re showing how different they are and how she longs for someone to understand her, etc…”.  I get that.  I just don’t think it’s really any more clever than the next DECENT movie giving messages in exactly the same way.  Without being brilliant.  Just like this.

Parts are just overblown and annoying, because they’re supposed to be brilliant but I know they’re not.  I particularly groaned (not just bored, annoyed) at the artsy-craftsy visuals.

Vastly overrated.  After 40, it’s barely watchable.  And it HURTS.

Grade: D-

“…he looked like a doctor.
He did, actually.
That’s true.
But he wasn’t, unfortunately.”

A lunatic who believes he is a doctor escapes from confinement and carries out his “work”.

He’s pretty creepy and/or campy when he’s not giggling stupidly.

Somewhat better than your typical cr@p horror flick.  And there are a few clever, funny moments amidst all the stupid ones.

Inspirational Quote: “Terminal.”

Grade: D

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

Not to be confused with ‘World War Z’.  There are a lot of streaming movies that need a tag to that effect regarding some other (major) movie.

People become infected by a space germ and start eating other people.

There’s attention paid to trying to develop characters that you care about, but it’s not done very well so you really don’t care all that much.  At least, I don’t.  Seems shallow emotionally, superficial; just as bad as if they hadn’t bothered and just gone with all gore.

It’s completely serious, not camp.  And it’s just good enough that you can’t really laugh at it, you just have to tolerate it or – maybe, if you see something I don’t – enjoy it mildly as an infected/zombie flick.

The actors seem to do their best, but that doesn’t stop the acting from descending often into B-Grade.

Ok…there’s one moment of REALLY bad gore FX about halfway through, but where it loses my consideration for anything above a D- comes when an infected tears a woman’s arm off and then beats another woman to death with a REALLY bad prop.  Maybe that’s not how I wanna go.

About an hour in: bad infected behavior continuity.  Lazy, lazy!

The ending drama might do something for you if you’re in the right mood.  And you won’t be missing anything if you skip to it to find out.

Grade: D-

Stylish crime drama/action/dark comedy.   Stylish like Tarantino, so you don’t really need to know what the actual plot is.

You know, one of those types.  Lots of clever references and a few interesting visuals.

It’s a little TOO clever for me most times, though…references that make sense but don’t seem amusing, just self-indulgent. 

Or boring, if you prefer. 

Not as bad as ‘DIEner”s subtitle, but you get the idea.  And if you don’t, check it out.

Ending’s pretty cool, though.

Grade: C-

Yeah, I saw this when it came out.  Ahhh…long gone days.

Really dark comedy/horror, of course.

Doesn’t disappoint after a brief interlude of not seeing it.  At LEAST ten years…it’s scarier than any movie it references and it feels real.

Good until the very ending, when it gets a bit weak.

Cutest character: David Arquette…awwww.

Great Moment In Nipple Shot History: Rose McGowan

Inspirational Quote: “You fcken hit me with the PHONE, d1ck!”

Grade: B

Extremely cheezy “terror” opening: “The Past”

Robert Englund with a horrid combover: “Present Day”

Then the “romantic tension” is announced via a rock song w/ the dialogue.

Features some really obvious extras movement.  That’s extras to the movie, moving in very obvious badly choreographed patterns.

And at one point you might get thirsty for some COKE.

First Wish: Screaming, shifting/growing little creature form, some COKE, and the female lead’s anguished face montage.

Oh, there’s an amazing no-crash insane driving sequence.  Apparently only swerving was in the budget.

Especially after a bit of Robert Englund and a VERY little Tony Todd.

There’s a killing spree near the end that wants to be ‘Hellraiser III’ but is more ‘Monty Python’s Sam Peckinpah’s Salad Days’.

If you wanna see the heroine vs. the djinn in a (boring) Wits N’ Wishes battle, that starts around the hour mark.

Inspirational Quote: “Yessss…the sh1t just…hit the fan, didn’t it?”

Grade: F

So there come times when I ask myself why I watch these wretched movies that I watch, knowing I must hate them because they stink and really, who wants to read about D- after D- after F…and do *I* really want to WRITE about them so badly?

But then there’s the occasional ‘Lo’ or ‘The Devil’s Rock’ or ‘Wake Wood’…a little gem of a movie that I otherwise would have missed.

This, believe it or not, falls into that saving-grace category.

It’s about a family that practices cannibalism on a semi-regular basis.  And, since it’s made well, it’s therefore quite disturbing…and interesting.

Low-key and yet creepy at the beginning and slowly but steadily building up in both what the family does/is revealed as having done and in the suspicions of others.

The mood is appropriate, and the acting by a no-name cast is quite good.

There are a few hokey “action” parts near the end, but they don’t last long and eventually the action isn’t so hokey.

It’s bloody disgusting, but it’s not hokey.

EXTREMELY gory/disturbing near the end.

Pretty powerful, actually.

Just one question: shaking hands…so ‘Book of Eli’ was right??

Grade: B

Slightly interesting opening featuring the Spanish/American Inquisition.

It quickly devolves into a religious/western/zombie/post-apoc mishmash.

Then Snipes explains his motivation.

Then it’s a lot of boredom and pondering and dullness.

Exceptions: A couple of the action scenes have some interest value, and tell me that little boy/girl doesn’t look like Newt!

Grade: D-

Presumption and 1st Impression: student-film level sh1t non-horror flick.

Christopher Lloyd gets some work and makes the best of it, and so does Kevin McDonald.

But the more I watched, the more I realized it was not complete sh1t. It was mostly sh1t, but decent mocking material, and some decent cheezy sh1t moments.

That’s not an endorsement…it’s a reprieve from sh1t failure land.

Approx. 1:11:00 – One of the finest unexpected moments in anti-Cage, pro-Conan cinematic history.

Inspirational Quote: “I’m gonna go poop.”

Grade: D-

Eric Idle proves he doesn’t need John Cleese to be funny.

Of course, John Cleese needs Idle even less, but there it is.

Occasionally amusing parody with short songs, some of which are fun and some of which are boring.

A bit better than ‘Bad News’ but nowhere near as good as ‘Tap’.

Highlights:
some of Idle’s writing
consistent camera problems
ripping off old bluesmen
Idle v. Radner

Lowlights:
many Python rips by Idle, not as funny the second time (I stopped counting at 4, not quite halfway through)
some of the songs

Grade: D+

I’ve watched them out of order, so I don’t know whether to say “improvement” or “downgrade”…but this is pretty insightful/direct/funny. 

Almost back to ‘Chewed Up’, I think.

And it’s a welcome return to very bad taste.

Favorite bits: extended Hate rant, slavery rant, extended Anti/Pro children rant

Inspirational Quote: “You don’t die, idiot, you just have a long sh1tty second half.”

Grade: B

This is his worst so far, IMPO.

It’s decent and watchable but it doesn’t seem inspired.  And it’s just plain not that funny.  A coupla chuckles/laughs is not good enough.

Grade: C-

Ok…forget everything I’ve ever said about this movie. 

It had been a LONG LONG time since I last saw it.  ‘Til now.

The intro is weak and the intro song sucks.

As for the movie…it’s got some completely weak/dull bits scattered liberally throughout.  It’s also got some really amusing/interesting bits scattered liberally throughout.

Nothing that’s PARTICULARLY funny…not up to ‘Holy Grail’ or any of the best of ‘Flying Circus’. 

The best parts come after about the 40 minute mark.  Some of them are lifted, but they rip their own material, so it’s not too bad.

And it’s got a nice message at the very end.

Inspirational Quote: “No, that’s the point…don’t let ANYONE tell you what to do!”

Grade: C+

Great intro…Steve Buscemi almost always satisfies.

This is a bunch of action scenes, mostly shootouts, spread out over the length of a movie by drama scenes that don’t really mean anything.

This movie doesn’t really mean anything.  But here are my favs:

– The first shootout after Buscemi’s warning: great music/action.

– Danny Trejo vs. Banderas and a car full of bad guys: great action/chaos theory ponderings.

A couple of scenes are also interesting/amusing…but most are just there because they have to be.

Grade: C-

Ok, so apparently there’s this little Asian boy with terrifyingly bad dental work.  And/or bad breath.

Just dumb.  That’s all.  Another sh1t Japanese horror flick.

Inspirational Quote: “oooooooooooaaaaaaaahhhhhhHHHHHHHHHHH”

Grade: F

There’s a hole in this thar movie!

So the kid sees soon-to-be-dead people?  Mostly dead?  Slightly alive?  Que?  Little boy in this movie: you are no Haley Joel Osment.

Freakiness/Weirdness is there, but the first not as much.  And there really isn’t much “scariness”…it’s mostly a longggg bit of atmosphere broken up by scenes; tedious in the middle.

I don’t buy the drama or the characters so much, probably because of the quality of the writing.  And acting.  Not horrid, but…not A-list.

After it seems over: The rest seems plastered on, thrown in because it still wasn’t good enough, a lame attempt at more suspense “action”.

With all that said, kudos to the director for making it watchable and semi-enjoyable.  I’m sure it wasn’t easy.

To all the critics that don’t “understand” the movie:  I think you misuse the word “understand”.  I understand it, I just think parts of it exist for no real reason, explained or otherwise.  It’s just someone’s attempt at a scary movie, that’s all.  And they had to pad around it and make it more “mysterious” to achieve anything at all.

But it’s not worth all the work.  Maybe it could’ve been a dark, creepy X-File.  But it wasn’t.

Grade: C

Easily the best thing about this is the relaxed lineup promo pic.

Somewhat odd, mostly over-wordy and boring (at least, after a while) crime drama.

Kevin Spacey as the “narrator” and one of the Usuals is really the only draw. 

Everything else is what an “ensemble cast” movie usually is: not good, but professional and therefore somewhat tolerable.  But nothing to watch voluntarily.

Disappointing…I was hoping for much better.

Inspirational Drool: Stephen Baldwin

Grade: D

Horrible aerial footage and completely out-of-place music indicates this will suck.  Nevertheless…

Oh God, the horrid dialogue. 

Oh God, the horrid battle scenes.

Brilliant scene selection, too.  Zoom in slightly on a dead body, then immediately cut to bad disco number cuz THEY can dance!

A lot of music and dancing to pad the film, of course.

And cr@ppy “gore” FX, especially with the Chia Zombies. 

And horrid foley.

Basically, this is a sh1t movie that you might get a kick out of if you like mocking said movie type.  In that case, it’s…serviceable.

Grade: D

It’s a Troma flick.  Most difficult part of reviewing it: deciding on ’87 or ’89.  I did a thorough couple minute search and I’m going with ’87.

I’ve explained Troma before, so let’s just say this one isn’t smart or funny in its horribleness.  I think I’m gonna stop watching these; this is a very persuasive argument.

According to Wikipedia, this is a “VERY low budget” film.  Caps mine, and I agree.

Answer: Oh, about 3 1/2 minutes.

6:57 – Production meeting
27:55-28:00 – At least one person gets a good laugh
55:57 – HAIKIBA!
1:01:25-40 – Camera sex

1:03:30-1:05:30 – Great moment in insane medical history, and the only at-all funny/clever part of the film.

Inspirational Quote: “Where’s a good place to take a sh1t?”

Grade: F-

Simon Pegg does nothing to help save this…save yourself the bother.

It’s supposed to be a clever, amusing dark comedy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mAwfAadI1KU

That’s about it, though.

Grade: D-

Starts off really well – tasteless and/or funny, and seemingly fresh.

That’s the first few minutes.

After that it becomes uneven: more amusing than funny, with a few exceptions.  And the mumbling/grunting gets on my fcken nerves after…right away.  I don’t want Tim Allen, I want Louis C.K.

He just doesn’t seem all that inspired sometimes.  For the first time that I’ve noticed, he seems vaguely fake in points.

Check out the highlights, then try another special, unless you demand to see them all.

Highlights: Dead Kid bit, Awkward Heterosexual Sucking bit, Sh1t bit

Grade: C+

This is a dark/silly comedy, despite the blood.  “Horror” is just such a misplaced word relating to this.

Stressed out man gets an alien thing in his body.

Best things about it: Distant relative of ‘How To Get Ahead In Advertising’ (perhaps a lovechild with ‘Office Space’), the train intro, and Peter Stormare.

Neutrals: Intelligence, Weirdness, Decent acting.

Worst thing about it: The fact that I got completely bored not quite halfway in and never gave a sh1t after that.

Grade: D

This is such an AMAZINGLY mediocre movie.  Truly, the level of not-good-but-not-too-bad is persistently off the charts.

Nick Nolte is a poor man’s…anyone.  Or a median-income man’s Mitchell.  Or a lucky man to get any roles at all.  Or a straw man if you pick on his acting over Murphy’s.

One good thing: Murphy is decent and sometimes amusing.

WOW is some of this music cheezy as hell.  WHY, James Horner?

If this had any effect on the making of GOOD cop/buddy action flicks, great, and thank you.  But by itself it’s a mediocre version of something that’s since been done to death, and much better.

Inspirational Quote: “There’s a new sheriff in town…and his name is Reggie Hammond.”

Grade: D

Extremely dated in parts (yes, beyond the norm for ’85), but it’s a fairly interesting/entertaining little movie. Parts REALLY drag, but parts hold up well.

I mean, it’s not a horror film. Don’t think it’s even trying for that. It’s more a dark and cheezy comedy with a little bit of mediocre drama thrown in. When the very few actually dramatic scenes occur, it does make them that much more…dramatic.

My opinion on it might be slightly dated given past (beginning near original release) viewings, but I think I’ve pretty much detached that and given it a reasonable/fair grade. And I only had to watch it for the 33rd time!

Inspirational Quote: “You’re so cool, Brewster!”

Grade: C

10/5/16: BETTER Inspirational Quote: “You havta have faith, for this to work on *me*, Mr. Vincent.”

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

Again, the problem: Hicks (as much as I’d want him to be) is not a very good stand-up comic.  I’m sorry, he’s not. (Thanks, NdT).

Repeats some material from ‘Dangerous’, and I think it’s safe to say makes ‘Dangerous’ completely irrelevant since it’s also better.

File under the “Admirable But Not Very Enjoyable” category.

Best Bits:  Weapons Catalog, Good Drugs/Good Drug Story

Inspirational Quote: “You know, I don’t know what y’all believe and I don’t really care.”

Grade: C

Like I said in my review of Hicks’ biopic, he’s not nearly as funny as he or I would like.

But he’s sincere and he’s at least somewhat amusing/intriguing in his anger/frustration.

I’d LIKE to grade him higher on sheer moral principle, but artistic integrity forces my hand yet again.

By the way…since I assume any stand-up comedian researches his/her material at least in a basic fashion, who is George Michaels?  If that offends you, chill the fck out…Hicks would have wanted you to.

Inspirational Quote: “Today a young man on acid realized that all matter is merely energy condensed to a slow vibration…that we are all one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively.  There’s no such thing as death, life is only a dream and we’re the imagination of ourselves.  Here’s Tom with the weather.”

Inspirational Idea: At the very end.

Grade: C-

Worst of the three I’ve seen so far, but that’s more a compliment to the other two.

C.K. is talented enough that even his “ok” is better than most comic’s “funny”.

Laughed a few times; REAL laughter, too…and was at least mildly amused for the rest of the time…could’ve used a few more of the first though.

Louis, at this point, is a bit like a security blanket…I can wrap myself in the knowledge that while he may not always be brilliant, he never stinks.  And this is some small comfort re: standup.

Tasteless, as usual…seems to have fun with it, as usual…doesn’t seem to give a fck if you’re offended or not, as usual.

Good, sensible, easy-to-understand pro Gay Rights section too.

Not his BEST, but it ain’t bad.  So if you’re anal about such things, start here.

Highlights:
Extra Jerky
bags of dicks
donuts and dead hookers

Inspirational Quote: “Who gives a sh1t?? It doesn’t MATTER, it doesn’t have any effect on your life, why the fck do you care?”

Grade: B-

For those who thought Russell was dumb/cliche in ‘Escape From New York’, well step aside…a new standard has been set.

It’s a nice, weird, silly, big, smelly pile of cheeze. Perfect for non-thinking, mocking, and potentially grinning/chuckling/laughing.

Inspirational Quote: “Now this really pisses me off to no end!”

Grade: D+

The best ‘Massive Headwound Harry’ cinematic performance ever.

Not nearly as scary or interesting as the book.

But it’s close enough to be a little bit of both.

Grade: C+