Lovato and Gomez are great actresses in a movie that overall is about as Disney Channel Original as you can get, but it'd be unfair to say it's bad. It's not, it's just kinda cute and charming.
Reviews
14 Reviews
Rapid Fire
(1992)
Awesome
18 August 2018
The great tragedy of this film is that of Brandon Lee. While obviously this was t his last film, I feel this is the one that really sold everyone on what he could do, with the crow selling on how good he could do it. This movie is not without its faults, I'm not denying that, but Lee is undoubtedly one of the strongest parts.
This might sound borderline blasphemous to say and I know I'm probably looking at it from a different outlook, but I think the fight scenes in Rapid Fire are as good as, if not better, than some of his father's. There's a genuine sense of energy and charisma to them and Lee makes it look easy. Every fight is well shot and directed (Dwight Little is a very underrated director and his style fits perfectly with this film), the action and sets allow for many creative outcomes and in a word, it just looks cool.
I would be remiss if I didn't mention Powers Boothe in this movie. He's awesome, and always was, be he hero or villain. He plays the grizzled Dirty Harry cop perfectly and looks as comfortable with a shotgun as he does with a doughnut.
I highly recommend this movie, if for nothing else than the fight scenes.
This might sound borderline blasphemous to say and I know I'm probably looking at it from a different outlook, but I think the fight scenes in Rapid Fire are as good as, if not better, than some of his father's. There's a genuine sense of energy and charisma to them and Lee makes it look easy. Every fight is well shot and directed (Dwight Little is a very underrated director and his style fits perfectly with this film), the action and sets allow for many creative outcomes and in a word, it just looks cool.
I would be remiss if I didn't mention Powers Boothe in this movie. He's awesome, and always was, be he hero or villain. He plays the grizzled Dirty Harry cop perfectly and looks as comfortable with a shotgun as he does with a doughnut.
I highly recommend this movie, if for nothing else than the fight scenes.
Conan the Barbarian
(2011)
No, it's not Schwarzenegger. So stop comparing it.
18 August 2018
Let's get the obvious out of the way, it's not as good as the original. That goes without saying, but this movie already had an incredibly high bar to reach so it's best not to compare, otherwise it'll just end badly for this film.
Saying this, I have to admit I kind of enjoyed this movie. It's overly dependant on CGI, kinda derivitave and the pacing is just weird at times, but it's still pretty enjoyable. Jason Momoa looks great as Conan, Rose McGowan and Ron Perlman were great as always, and for all the shaky cam and CGI, the action is, objectively, pretty cool to watch. Sure it's not Arnie swinging a broadsword into his enemies face, but if you take it for what it is, it's nowher near as bad as what some of the "great action scenes" of the 21st century claim is exciting.
Saying this, I have to admit I kind of enjoyed this movie. It's overly dependant on CGI, kinda derivitave and the pacing is just weird at times, but it's still pretty enjoyable. Jason Momoa looks great as Conan, Rose McGowan and Ron Perlman were great as always, and for all the shaky cam and CGI, the action is, objectively, pretty cool to watch. Sure it's not Arnie swinging a broadsword into his enemies face, but if you take it for what it is, it's nowher near as bad as what some of the "great action scenes" of the 21st century claim is exciting.
I don't think I've ever seen a movie like this
23 June 2018
Warning: Spoilers
First things first, this is definitely not the movie most people will go in thinking it is. There's no good vs evil, there's no slasher in a mask or ghosts or anything like that. There's not even really a hero. Your main character is Henry, played uncomfortably perfectly by Michael Rooker (ya know, Yondu). Henry is, as the title suggests, a serial killer. That's right, your protagonist is the bad guy. A violent, soft spoken, methodical, dangerous and scarily of all, smart. So yeah. If you're looking for a feel good happy ending, do not watch. I repeat. Do not watch! This movie is uncomfortable to watch. Not to be that douche guy but it's the type of movie you feel like showering after. But I digress.
So yeah, basically the movies story I guess you could call it is relatively simple. Henry, living in Chicago with his ex cell mate and his sister ( (cell mates, not his) Tom Towles and Tracey Arnold respectively) basically just goes about his day doing various things. It just so happens one of those things is killing people. Literally anyone. In fact, Henry makes a point of changing his method every time so it's harder to catch him. It's pretty sick, especially when you consider that it's based on real life serial killer Henry Lee Lucas.
Story wise in all honesty this movie is very simple, but honestly that's forgiveable. Michael Rooker is phenomenal as Henry, like full honesty I think this is the best performance of his career. He perfectly balances the switch in Henry that you can never really know what's going on inside his head, but you know it's not good. Tom towles and Tracy Arnold too are great and all three have great dynamics with each other, even if you kinda don't really care about Arnold all that much (nothing against her, but look at what she's up against).
Sooooo yeah, the violence in this movie is pretty disturbing, one scene in particular which I won't dare write about her, but needless to say anyone whose seen it knows exactly what I'm talking about and yeah, it's difficult to watch. It's not even that it's gory because it's honestly not, it just feels a bit to real to I guess separate. The ending too is one of the more objectively big downer endings I think I've ever seen though to be fair, look at the title. That's all you needed to know.
Okay so this isn't for everyone, but it's still a phenomenal character study. Approach with caution, but check it out if you get a chance
So yeah, basically the movies story I guess you could call it is relatively simple. Henry, living in Chicago with his ex cell mate and his sister ( (cell mates, not his) Tom Towles and Tracey Arnold respectively) basically just goes about his day doing various things. It just so happens one of those things is killing people. Literally anyone. In fact, Henry makes a point of changing his method every time so it's harder to catch him. It's pretty sick, especially when you consider that it's based on real life serial killer Henry Lee Lucas.
Story wise in all honesty this movie is very simple, but honestly that's forgiveable. Michael Rooker is phenomenal as Henry, like full honesty I think this is the best performance of his career. He perfectly balances the switch in Henry that you can never really know what's going on inside his head, but you know it's not good. Tom towles and Tracy Arnold too are great and all three have great dynamics with each other, even if you kinda don't really care about Arnold all that much (nothing against her, but look at what she's up against).
Sooooo yeah, the violence in this movie is pretty disturbing, one scene in particular which I won't dare write about her, but needless to say anyone whose seen it knows exactly what I'm talking about and yeah, it's difficult to watch. It's not even that it's gory because it's honestly not, it just feels a bit to real to I guess separate. The ending too is one of the more objectively big downer endings I think I've ever seen though to be fair, look at the title. That's all you needed to know.
Okay so this isn't for everyone, but it's still a phenomenal character study. Approach with caution, but check it out if you get a chance
Prince of Darkness
(1987)
Criminally underrated
19 June 2018
John Carpenters apocalypse trilogy is, in my mind, the greatest trilogy in horror and probably cinema (even better than godfather and evil dead). All three films are fantastic in their own right, but this one seems to get a lot less love than the thing and in the mouth of madness. To a point I can understand why even if I don't agree. The first thing you have to know going in is this is a very slow paced film. That isn't a bad thing at all, it just means that it takes its time. A lot of what happens is escalation: things start to go wrong in a crescendo until the finale. And while the thing is without a doubt my favourite move and entry into the trilogy, I have to admit that Prince of Darkness is the only one of the three to genuinely scare me.
Let me explain: while yes it's not as subtle or tense as the thing, nor is it as existentially insane as in the mouth of madness, the horror in prince of darkness is one of inevitability and dread. The slow burn crescendo works perfectly here in a way where you're kind of left feeling like the heroes didn't actually save the day, they just delayed it slightly and next time they'll be even more Ill prepared than before. It's a very unsettling prospect and one that left me with shivers the first time I saw it.
This is not a movie for everyone, and that's not a bad thing. Some will like it, others won't. All that really matters is how it makes you feel. Check it out and see
Let me explain: while yes it's not as subtle or tense as the thing, nor is it as existentially insane as in the mouth of madness, the horror in prince of darkness is one of inevitability and dread. The slow burn crescendo works perfectly here in a way where you're kind of left feeling like the heroes didn't actually save the day, they just delayed it slightly and next time they'll be even more Ill prepared than before. It's a very unsettling prospect and one that left me with shivers the first time I saw it.
This is not a movie for everyone, and that's not a bad thing. Some will like it, others won't. All that really matters is how it makes you feel. Check it out and see
Cannibal Holocaust
(1980)
So.....that just happened......
19 June 2018
Let's get the obvious out of the way, this is a very disturbing movie, and as someone who can watch abbatoir footage completely stonefaced, this is somehow worse. Watching it at times I honestly felt sick and finishing it I vowed I would never watch it again. This is a very uncomfortable film. Approach with caution.
Now that's out of the way, while I don't like this movie for a few reasons (I'm not even going to attempt to say why) I do have to admit it is pretty clever. In spite of its hypocritical production (again, I'm not getting into it) the basic idea is about sensationalism and how the media chooses to spin things, so to be completely fair it is pretty clever......at first.
Like I said, this movie is very disturbing and veeeeery uncomfortable. It is admittedly very well acted, though inevitably some of the ADR is kinda flaky, the idea is quite clever and I hate to admit it but it's directed and shot very well, especially by 70's/80's exploitation standards, but none of this justifies anything that happens on screen. My five out of ten grade was very begrudging. Make of that what you will but don't say I didn't warn you
Now that's out of the way, while I don't like this movie for a few reasons (I'm not even going to attempt to say why) I do have to admit it is pretty clever. In spite of its hypocritical production (again, I'm not getting into it) the basic idea is about sensationalism and how the media chooses to spin things, so to be completely fair it is pretty clever......at first.
Like I said, this movie is very disturbing and veeeeery uncomfortable. It is admittedly very well acted, though inevitably some of the ADR is kinda flaky, the idea is quite clever and I hate to admit it but it's directed and shot very well, especially by 70's/80's exploitation standards, but none of this justifies anything that happens on screen. My five out of ten grade was very begrudging. Make of that what you will but don't say I didn't warn you
Homecoming
(I) (2009)
To be entirely fair, it could have been a lot worse
19 June 2018
Look let's be honest, this movie is nothing special. It's at best an alright misery rip off and at worse a brundlefly of better movies. However, I honestly can't hate it. Like okay it's not my favourite movie by a long shot (though I'd be lying if I said I really like Jessica Stroup in anything.......except prom night and iron fist but more on those later) but it's at least acknowledging of how derivative it is. Mischa Barton is ridiculous but still kinda creepy, the boyfriend is pretty likeable if a bit too naive at times, there's some moments in it that make me genuinely flinch every time I see them (that ankle break is pretty brutal). So yeah, it's shameless in deriding from better movies but come on, you knew that going in. It's cliched, silly and at a few points just plain weird, but if you can switch your brain off for a bit, it's not bad.
Sorority Row
(2009)
Surprisingly watchable
20 March 2018
Warning: Spoilers
Okay I'm going to say it straight up: I kinda like this movie. It's dumb, cheesy, gratuitous and very much a cash in with no real artistic merit other than making money, but even then, it's probably one of the better movies to do that. Like honestly, a movie where someone dies via flare to the mouth is at least trying.
Okay so now that's out of the way, Sorority Row is an admittedly very loose remake of an obscure 80's slasher movie that itself was formulaic and nothing particularly special, so by that merit this movie is actually better than the original, though that's not really saying much. Whereas the original was pretty forgettable, this one actually has a few pretty memorable moments (and no, I don't mean the fact that pretty much every female character in the movie has at least two scenes where they're half naked). It's surprisingly enjoyable if you can shut your brain off and just go with it and the acting, while very often Christmas levels of hammy, still gets the point across. Check it out, and have a bit of fun
Okay so now that's out of the way, Sorority Row is an admittedly very loose remake of an obscure 80's slasher movie that itself was formulaic and nothing particularly special, so by that merit this movie is actually better than the original, though that's not really saying much. Whereas the original was pretty forgettable, this one actually has a few pretty memorable moments (and no, I don't mean the fact that pretty much every female character in the movie has at least two scenes where they're half naked). It's surprisingly enjoyable if you can shut your brain off and just go with it and the acting, while very often Christmas levels of hammy, still gets the point across. Check it out, and have a bit of fun
Far from perfect, but a huge improvement
18 March 2018
The anaconda series is an interesting one for me. While it's definitely not a good series, it has its moments and is mostly harmless fun. However, in terms of comparing the first film and this one, for all its faults I'd actually say this one is the superior film.
Yes, despite being set in Borneo where anacondas don't live, this film takes itself a lot more seriously than the first one. Dwight Little I'm a big fan of, and his style is definitely present throughout. The acting too for the most part is pretty good and it's beautifully shot. I don't think I've ever seen such a rich jungle environment.
The snake effects too look so much better than the first one and, admittedly quite shockingly, this movie answers some logic questions from the first movie, the main one being how are these snakes growing so big/killing so many people so quickly
All in all it's not a great movie, but it's still pretty enjoyable
Yes, despite being set in Borneo where anacondas don't live, this film takes itself a lot more seriously than the first one. Dwight Little I'm a big fan of, and his style is definitely present throughout. The acting too for the most part is pretty good and it's beautifully shot. I don't think I've ever seen such a rich jungle environment.
The snake effects too look so much better than the first one and, admittedly quite shockingly, this movie answers some logic questions from the first movie, the main one being how are these snakes growing so big/killing so many people so quickly
All in all it's not a great movie, but it's still pretty enjoyable
The Fly
(1986)
Cronenberg is the king of body horror
7 September 2013
Warning: Spoilers
I first saw this film in July with my father and sister. I knew it was going to get bad. Just how bad, I didn't know. Within the first ten minutes, the shocked reaction of the theatre patrons could be heard, and I knew that what I was watching was one of the scariest films I've ever seen.
The fly is a tragic blend of sci fi, romance and, in typical David Cronenberg fashion, body horror. The story is of Seth Brundle, a young scientist whose experimentations with a newly created teleporter goes horribly, horribly wrong. What follows is one of two things, depending on what kind of audience member you are: either the most amazing display of special and make up effects since the Italian horror classic Zombi, or the most disgusting scenes of body horror ever shown.
The film itself is driven through the central performances of Jeff Golblum and Geena Davis, whose on screen chemistry reflects on their real life relationship, as well as providing some much needed heart to the characters. Goldblum, even when he's under the heaviest extent of makeup, still conveys the heart and conflicting mental state of Seth Brundle, while also showing an eccentricity that blends well with Davis's down to earth portrayal.
Now, there is not a person alive who can talk about this movie without mentioning the incredible special effects. Most Cronenberg films pride themselves on having vomit inducing special effects, but the fly has the most sickening. the various stages of Brundle's decay are really quite hard to watch, but what's worse is the scenes of Brundle discovering his new bodily functions. I wont give too much away, but you'll never want to bite your fingernails after watching.
Though a remake, the fly remains one of the only films that surpasses the original. It adjusts well to time, and, though disgusting in parts, is quite an enjoyable film. If you're planning on watching it any time soon, though, a word of advice: don't eat anything before or during. It'll come back up.
The fly is a tragic blend of sci fi, romance and, in typical David Cronenberg fashion, body horror. The story is of Seth Brundle, a young scientist whose experimentations with a newly created teleporter goes horribly, horribly wrong. What follows is one of two things, depending on what kind of audience member you are: either the most amazing display of special and make up effects since the Italian horror classic Zombi, or the most disgusting scenes of body horror ever shown.
The film itself is driven through the central performances of Jeff Golblum and Geena Davis, whose on screen chemistry reflects on their real life relationship, as well as providing some much needed heart to the characters. Goldblum, even when he's under the heaviest extent of makeup, still conveys the heart and conflicting mental state of Seth Brundle, while also showing an eccentricity that blends well with Davis's down to earth portrayal.
Now, there is not a person alive who can talk about this movie without mentioning the incredible special effects. Most Cronenberg films pride themselves on having vomit inducing special effects, but the fly has the most sickening. the various stages of Brundle's decay are really quite hard to watch, but what's worse is the scenes of Brundle discovering his new bodily functions. I wont give too much away, but you'll never want to bite your fingernails after watching.
Though a remake, the fly remains one of the only films that surpasses the original. It adjusts well to time, and, though disgusting in parts, is quite an enjoyable film. If you're planning on watching it any time soon, though, a word of advice: don't eat anything before or during. It'll come back up.
Homecoming
(I) (2009)
Underrated, and significantly better than everyone else says
6 September 2013
Warning: Spoilers
Watching this movie, I was reminded of why I love these kinds of movies. They are simple, effective, and most of all, good. And that is what this movie is: Good. Comparisons to Fatal Attraction and Misery can be drawn, but this is its own movie, and that is its brilliance.
First off, the story isn't anything new, but it works in the films favor. Basically, guy meets girl, guy dates girl, guy brings girl home to his town for his football jersey retirement, guys psycho ex kidnaps girl, and that's about it. It's simple and dated, but still fun to watch. The reason why I like this film so much, however, is because often times, it feels real. I don't mind violence and gore in movies. I can watch the goriest films ever made and still sleep like a baby. Where Homecoming is different is that its gore and violence is spaced out and simple: rather than excessive blood shed, it tones it down, and when it does occur, it is some of the few moments committed to celluloid that can make me cringe, and that is saying something.
the other aspect of the film that makes it work so well is the acting. I'm not Mischa Barton's biggest fan, but she was genuinely creepy and quite gives an unnerving performance. Matt Long makes for a great oblivious boyfriend, and he plays the character well, occasionally adding a light attitude to otherwise quiet scenes of dialog. However, the best performance in the film is Jessica Stroup. Her character is well played, sympathetic, and, most importantly, believable. It also helps that she is quite beautiful, adding a sense of innocence to the character that would have otherwise been absent.
The film is not without flaws, but then again, so is every other movie. Despite comparisons that can be made between Homecoming and others, it is well crafted, the performances are well played and the violence is spaced out enough and realistic enough to make even the most conditioned of gore hounds cringe. It is a fine example of a modern thriller, and deserves more praise than it gets.
First off, the story isn't anything new, but it works in the films favor. Basically, guy meets girl, guy dates girl, guy brings girl home to his town for his football jersey retirement, guys psycho ex kidnaps girl, and that's about it. It's simple and dated, but still fun to watch. The reason why I like this film so much, however, is because often times, it feels real. I don't mind violence and gore in movies. I can watch the goriest films ever made and still sleep like a baby. Where Homecoming is different is that its gore and violence is spaced out and simple: rather than excessive blood shed, it tones it down, and when it does occur, it is some of the few moments committed to celluloid that can make me cringe, and that is saying something.
the other aspect of the film that makes it work so well is the acting. I'm not Mischa Barton's biggest fan, but she was genuinely creepy and quite gives an unnerving performance. Matt Long makes for a great oblivious boyfriend, and he plays the character well, occasionally adding a light attitude to otherwise quiet scenes of dialog. However, the best performance in the film is Jessica Stroup. Her character is well played, sympathetic, and, most importantly, believable. It also helps that she is quite beautiful, adding a sense of innocence to the character that would have otherwise been absent.
The film is not without flaws, but then again, so is every other movie. Despite comparisons that can be made between Homecoming and others, it is well crafted, the performances are well played and the violence is spaced out enough and realistic enough to make even the most conditioned of gore hounds cringe. It is a fine example of a modern thriller, and deserves more praise than it gets.
ECW One Night Stand
(2005 TV Special)
ecw before it got bad
6 September 2013
Warning: Spoilers
ECW's resurrection show is without argument the best thing that happened to it during its second coming. The show represented everything good about the old school ECW, and was everything that made it work. I'll start with the matches. Jericho vs Storm A great opening contest, the contest showcased the technical gifts of both competitors. The only problem with the match came from its end. It could have been a standout match if not for it. Mysterio vs Psicosis Another great match, the Lucha Libre style looks great in this bout, and though not the best, definitely gets things going. Benoit vs Guerrerro Again, not the best match, but a good one. Both of the late wrestlers put on a great showcase of their abilities. Sabu vs Rhino Now we're getting into the good stuff. Set after an emotional RVD speech, this match was the first display of extreme wrestling. Tables, chairs, and the suicidal, homicidal, genocidal, death defying mad man make a great match. Awesome vs Tanaka Arguably the best match of the entire show, Mike Awesome and Masato Tanaka put on a contest which highlights the best of both competitors. Awesomes insanely athletic abilities and hardcore style clashed wonderfully with Tanaka, and the matches climax made for a fantastic match. Dreamer, Sandman vs Dudleys I'm a Dreamer fan. I'll admit it. This match is second only to its former. The amount of weapons used is truly wonderful for extreme fans, and shows the best of both teams. The conclusion was amazing, and I liked the appearance by Beulah, Kid Kash, the B.W.O, the hardcore chair swinging freaks and especially Spike Dudley. A great way to end a great show.
Punisher: War Zone
(2008)
One of the most underrated comic book movies ever
6 September 2013
Being a fan of the Punisher comic books, I watched this movie knowing what to expect. While I was watching it, I was happy to have my expectations met. Punisher War Zone is a visceral and violent as the comics let it be, blending it with brilliantly placed comedy. Lexi Alexander has made a comic book film for the fans, not shying away from any graphic violence and this is one thing that makes the film so brilliant.
Violence aside, the film is brilliant in its look and performances. Ray Stevenson fits the look of the Punisher, barely changing facial expression throughout the film. Dominic West, as well, is to be praised for his portrayal of Jigsaw. However, the performance that steals the show is Doug Hutcherson as Loony Bin Jim. His mere presence on screen is enough to creep you out.
This movie is not for everyone. It is not The Dark Knight, and it is definitely not Iron Man. This is a movie that cannot be viewed properly by those expecting to see any of these movies, but if viewed without these expectations, it can be appreciated for what it is: the perfect Punisher film for Punisher fans.
Violence aside, the film is brilliant in its look and performances. Ray Stevenson fits the look of the Punisher, barely changing facial expression throughout the film. Dominic West, as well, is to be praised for his portrayal of Jigsaw. However, the performance that steals the show is Doug Hutcherson as Loony Bin Jim. His mere presence on screen is enough to creep you out.
This movie is not for everyone. It is not The Dark Knight, and it is definitely not Iron Man. This is a movie that cannot be viewed properly by those expecting to see any of these movies, but if viewed without these expectations, it can be appreciated for what it is: the perfect Punisher film for Punisher fans.
Tell Your Friends