Change Your Image
stewartlehr
Reviews
The Reef: Stalked (2022)
Much better than I expected and it has character development
I have to disagree with most of the reviewers insofar as if there is one failing with many shark films is that there is a lack of character development. The Reef: Stalked devotes a third of the movie towards character depth and deals with the issues of domestic violence, personal loss and grief as a backdrop and lead-in to the main game...the shark.
The lead actors grow up and learn how to deal with their own crises and I find that commendable in this type movie.
The acting is competent TV level "Neighbours" and that's far better than what you'll see on TUBI.
Yet again the Great White shark gets a bum deal.
Great White sharks don't like human flesh they prefer seals, fish and dolphins but they are relentless in the pursuit of their prey. However, after the first bite they'd lose interest. A Tiger shark on the other hand simply loves us and places us high on it's menu so howabout bringing that on in a movie.
Special effects were OK but the film had a sub-standard ending.
On a personal level I kept looking at the weathered rocks and had this "I've been there" feeling and that's because it was filmed near Bowen, Queensland which is part of the southern the Whitsundays.
WTH, I lived near there and used to swim at a beach in Bowen. Needless to say I used to go the islands quite often as well. No wonder it had a familiar feeling.
Coming back to movie there are a number of faults.
1. At one point we see that the water is choppy and
the next shot shows us calm tropical waters.
2. At times, if you look closely you can see that it is
filmed close to shore.
3. Things just seem to appear in the boat...not good!
All in all this isn't a bad movie it just could have been better.
I'm giving this a solid six rating and for what it's worth the original "Reef" movie chomps this for dead.
Kill Her Goats (2023)
Slasher movie misses the mark
How can a reviewer write 600 words on this mess of a movie?
A slasher movie needs to have certain things to make it in the genre such as:
1. Tits! Yep, plenty of visuals there. From the opening scene gravity and skin interact. I might add that Ms Raycene more than contributes in that area
2. Bums! Yep, plenty of visuals there as well. Bouncing bums aplenty.
3. Acting? This movie has such little competent thespian qualities that Ms Raycene almost hits the mark. I said almost because the final scenes end in an incoherent bloody mess.
4. Plot? Well there is a plot but it's gossamer thin and in the end the director lost control of the movie.
I really need to watch again to work out the plot but life is too short and watching this mess is just painful.
So how to you rate a movie like this? Well, it gets one point for the tits and bums and another point for the copious amounts of (fake) blood.
Oh what the hell, I'll give it another point for Ms Raycene's bust.
I'm giving it a generous 3/10 and I want my wasted time back!
Bull Shark (2022)
Had some potential but then went off the deep end
First off this movie was a free release on the net and I got what I paid for...not much!
First the good news. The lead actor Thom Hallum is an experienced actor but his character was so clichéd that it dominated and eventually overwhelmed his part in the movie.
Derek Woodford, the Sheriff was in the same boat (pun intended) but he was underused. He'd pop in and out of the movie and that was pretty much it.
After that the thespian qualities becomes very thin on the water. And here's the rub, I haven't even gotten around to discussing the story itself. The problem here is that there's hardly any story to discuss.
Sure, it was a change to have a shark movie about a fish other than a Great White, which really does get a bad rap in virtually all shark movies. And like the Great White, the Bull Shark (once known as Bronze Whalers) doesn't exactly like human food. And the same can be said about most sharks and humans.
So what shark does have a particular taste for people...it's the Tiger Shark. They'll go for a human and they'll follow until they chomp their way through the targeted food source.
Now you might be wondering why I know so much about sharks? Well I live in Australia and surfed for around forty years and had a shark swim under my board at the age of fourteen. Also, I've done a lot reading on the subject. And therein lies the problem with this production...there was a lack of research.
The movie itself was reasonable until one hour and three minutes and then it completely went off the (boat's) rails. I won't give it away but I seriously cracked up and by the end of the movie I didn't know whether to laugh or cry.
Now this isn't a spoiler but if you're trying to attract a shark you can do a number of things. One is to throw fish bait into the water. Another is to throw blood and meat into the water and that will have the same results. And a third method is to jump into the water and splash around. See the movie and you can see which one they accurately go for.
OK, so after this analysis there must be someone or something to blame. Well the production company is ITV and they are a low rent mob that are little better (or maybe worse) than The Asylum.
The second blame magnet is Brett Bentman who wrote and directed this woeful story. I mean for crying out loud all he had to do was start off with Wikipedia and then go to some sea world people and possibly approach an expert on the subject. Nah, too much work so he just made it up.
I could go on and on about movie but it's just too painful. So where will this disaster end up? The same place that all ITV productions end up...Tubi of course.
Oh and you have to wait until after the credits for the final nail in this production's coffin. It's a real humdinger.
I gave this movie two stars and that was for the first hour or so and zilch after that.
Shark Side of the Moon (2022)
Life is too Short
I caught this on TUBI last night and frankly this is one of the worst movies that I have ever viewed. Frankly life is too short to waste your time on this disaster.
1. Acting ranges from barely adequate to poor
2. CGI looks like it was designed on a Pentium 3 or
Apple Power PC (almost twenty years old).
3. The storyline is so ridiculous and takes place
on the far side of the moon which is perpetually
dark...except in this movie.
4. The science behind this "money laundering"
exercise was obviously based on pre-Gallileo
science.
The only redeeming feature of this trainwreck was the ending which points to no sequels. Thank the gods and pass the bottle!
Believe me, life is too short to waste your time on this insult to your intelligence. Alternatively, if you just want a good laugh then this movie maybe for you.
Ice (1998)
The Day After Tomorrow ripped off this movie
I'm not going to add to all the reviews here by saying that it's a decent movie and it's well worth the popcorn.
Whilst I'm not criticising this film someone associated with the film The Day After Tomorrow (TDAT) ripped off a part of this movie and incorporated much the same scene and dialogue in the latter.
Here's one scene in particular. In TDAT one of the characters couldn't part with a copy of the Gutenberg Dictionary. In the film Ice its a copy of Dante's Inferno.
Now at first I thought the people behind this movie were the culprits but alas it's the other way round. This movie was made in 1998 and released in 2000 whereas TDAT was released in 2004. Do the math!
Now other parts of this movie were also lifted but that's most blatant. And now that I've identified one part of the movie I'm going to watch it again because there other parts that have been lifted as well. The aforementioned example is just the most blatant. I wonder if anyone associated with Ice is actually aware of this?
Sky Sharks (2020)
Appalling doesn't really describe how bad this production is
I watched this production whilst I was in day surgery having an infusion. It was so bad I had more entertainment with a tube sticking out of my vein.
Acting: 1/10
Production: 0/10
Scripting: 0/10
My medical procedure: 10/10
Summary: Life is too short to waste on this horrible production. Please note I refuse to use the word "movie" as you might confuse it with other productions. I sincerely believe this is the worst of the worst. Get your phone and video a crawling cockroach and that would be more entertaining.
I absolutely refuse to give this a rating. There are no spoilers in this review because I purposely refrained from describing the story behind it because there nothing to describe. Now I feel nauseous even providing a review.
Dune Drifter (2020)
Solid science fiction
If you're into science fiction then Dune Drifter is a solid addition to the genre.
First off the criticisms:
1. The title has absolutely nothing to do with the plot. As soon as you use te word Dune in a title then you automatically think of the various attempts at bringing the Frank Herbert science fiction movie/TV mini series.
2. Outside of the two leads namely Phoebe Sparrow and Daisey Aitkens the thespian depth becomes somewhat shallow. One "actor" obviously got the gig because of her lungs.
3. At times the CGI is a little below standard.
However this movie meanders around a little until they land on the planet. It's then that Dune Drifter really gets into gear. It's about survival on a hostile planet with hostile aliens.
This a budget movie and at times the budgeting shows but it does have an engaging plot and the two leads particularly Ms Sparrow know how to push the story along.
Finally there are two points to make. First there's the humour; that hair really is a pain. Watch the movie and you'll know what I mean. Second, one reviewer said the aliens were wearing jeans. Rubbish! They are wearing motorcycle pants. If you look closely you'll see the reinforced armour.