Change Your Image
j-cherry-630-782328
Reviews
Spartacus: Blood and Sand (2010)
needs less sex!
this could have been an absolute masterpiece! the characters are complex and interesting and (almost)all of them have a side you can admire or sympathise with, the fight scenes are great, the story is very good and centres on a struggle for freedom and survival within the blood soaked roman arenas! with a few good subplots, the acting is just perfect (john hannah being particularly good)and (rather refreshingly)the main character is portrayed as a normal man!..ie while still being strong, brave and noble he is not above fault and is frequently defeated,out smarted and has a number of notable flaws to his character like temper,pride etc (unlike some of these perfect, hero worshipped, mary sue type characters most action films/series tend to have) and therefore is more endearing and understandable to the viewer.
HOWEVER i felt a major throwback was the amount of nudity within every episode!, while i appreciate the need for realism by portraying the debauchery and corruption of the roman nobles and how it affected the unfortunate slaves and gladiators, there was no need to have full frontals (male and female)in almost every possible situation and almost endless scenes of graphic sex,masturbation and naked dancing which distracted from the perfectly good story and added a distasteful edge to the whole series, afterall it is perfectly possible to express debauchery without half the cast showing their genitals to the camera (as the film "taken" aptly proves. im not a prude by any sense of the word but i found the whole thing oversexed and as such took away the shock value of the humiliation and degradation suffered by the slaves by making the audience enjoy the sight of it. also the graphic nature of the scenes greatly restricts the number of people who can watch the series (my brother loves gladiator films but is not allowed to watch it because the scenes are so graphic we might as well just put a porno on, which is such a shame as that is the only reason) also the overuse of fairly modern swear words such as the f word and the c word causes the series to lose its realism. so overall i was a little saddened by Sparticus blood and sand as it shoots itself in the foot by having the deluge of nudity and sex distract from the masterpiece of a series it could be.
Gutterballs (2008)
insult to the genre of horror!
despite my friends general opinion that the genre of horror was invented by a sick moron without anything better to do, i however beg to differ...to truly frighten an audience as the genre is MEANT to do the creator must delve into the human mind to explore what drives terror! then once that is found can then set about bringing that unconscious terror alive through the careful planning of a good story, a gritty script,believable actors,empathetic characters and of course the frights themselves.....this film however had none of the above and was overall the most boring,painful and intelligence insulting movie experience that i have suffered since i watched the first twilight movie!
the acting was terrible,the script sounded like it was spewed by a foul mouthed illiterate on a bad day, the characters where both unbelievable and completely unlikeable and the gore was dull and predictable(but slightly gratifying due to the infuriating nature of the characters). the infamous rape was more distasteful than disturbing due to the highly graphic and exploitive nature of the scene....designed more to "turn you on" than to shock and repulse, adding to the idea i got that the film was made purely to satisfy the perverted needs of the director. likewise the other sex scenes where exploitive and ridiculous and the transvestite scene was, to put it simply, a load of b***s! overall i found the film boring,irritating and a total waste of my time. was just the typical clichéd mysterious serial killer turning up and slaughtering a bunch of typically annoying characters that really were asking for it....warning to all serious horror film lovers stay well away...if you must look at your TV static...it is a lot more interesting and clever than this film!!
Insidious (2010)
genuinely frightening, the only horror film i have seen that actually scared me!
although iv always been a fan of the horror genre I'm obsessively critical of it and therefore find most of them bland,uninspiring,basic and completely unscary, this on the other hand proved different! throughout the entire film i was on the edge of my seat and was jolting in fright like a hyperactive jack in the box. the thing that got to me about this film was the lack of gore in it,i have noticed that gallons of blood in horrors is a lazy (and rather boring)backdrop for a lot of directors to compensate for lack of a good story and/or script (like hostel for example) however this movie managed to keep suspense, tension and shock to the maximum with minimal blood due to excellent camera work, convincing acting,great timing and a perfect score that sent a chill down my spine on every bass note! a rare gem in that it also managed to keep interest to the very end without lowering the bar to the clichés of the slashers and other B rated "horrors" by having no nudity what so ever and hardly any profanity which allowed the viewer to be consumed with the full weight of the suspense without any distractions. i would fully recommend this film to any hardcore horror fan, however i would suggest you sleep with the light on if you watch it at night...the film has a way of staying with you well after watching it, a masterpiece of suspense in my opinion and well worth going to the cinema for..if you dare! muhaha
Monsters (2010)
flat and misleading
OK i wasn't expecting a masterpiece but after watching the trailer i was at least expecting what it said on the box a "thriller" how wrong was I! first off there was no action what so ever, the boring and very basic octopus shaped aliens just wander around occasionally doing something worth noting and at the end having a little bonding session by the looks of it! the characters are totally non developed and very hard to like or sympathize with, as it goes the reporter protagonist is told to go and get his boss's daughter out of the infected Mexico and back into the good old USA, however despite the impending doom of the "infected" he still behaves like a bored and irresponsible teenager throughout the whole movie, asking stupid questions like "why do they have guns?" well if there is an alien invasion what do you think they would be carrying? pepper spray?, also his female companion serves to add nothing to the film save a load of selfish actions and constant lying which makes her not only a very boring character but also a highly unlikable one. and thats it really the story was very boring, the ending managed to both explained nothing and conclude nothing and the viewer is instead left with the sentiment of why on earth was this film even made? a huge disappointment that was both mind numbingly stupid and highly uninteresting, do not watch it.
Alex Rider: Operation Stormbreaker (2006)
awful is too good for this film!!
OK i admit im not a huge fan of the alex rider series but i did admit that stormbreaker could make a good film. so when it came out i decided to check it out, i have consequently lost 1.5hours of my life THAT I CAN NEVER HAVE BACK!! there were so many plot holes it hurt i shall now attempt to list the most obvious. 1 why was the access to MI6 in a public photobooth? surely someone would have noticed the huge flashes of light and that certain people never left it..also Alex Rider is not a member of MI6 so does that mean other random members of the public can just waltz in?
2 Jack starbright's appalling fight with Missi pyle's character = what the hell? it is totally pointless and not even in the book.
3 the character of Alex is a travesty he practically gives his identity away in the first 5 seconds "my uncle was a security guard, he was killed and i'll find out who did it" well duh they just did it to his uncle! he might as well have said ..hi im Alex..my uncles replacement!and the whole bicycle chase scene had me crying with laughter..
4 Smithers in a toy shop!?...er so the man who makes all the secret gadgets for MI6 works in a toy store..yer i can see that happening..NOT!!
5 what kind of martial arts security guard falls for such a stupid trick like the "bowing scene" im sorry but that really was bad
6 all of the characters were rushed,stereotypical and even the great actors like Mickey Rouke and Bill Nighy were restricted by the appalling director and were turned into cartoons. Alex was wooden,Missi was a joke, Jack was completely out of character and Sabina was not only badly portrayed by some hammy second rate actress but she Wasn't EVEN SUPPOSED TO BE THERE!!! honestly i don't know how antony horrowitz could have stood there and approve of the shambles made of a book,that although i think not that good, had such great potential.
the entire film was rushed, according to Mr Horrowitz the reason for this was to get to the end scene...er what for? the hammy horse scene? the lame death of Sayle? the bad parachute scene? the pigeon getting shot? what? what? what was there at the end that we all missed!!?? the end credits maybe? (best part of the film) a waste of characters,waste of good acting potential,waste of money and a waste of time save yourself from this utter waste of space and do not watch!!!!
Vampires Suck (2010)
all right...could have been WAY better
OK so lets be honest it was never going to be that great considering vampires suck was a spoof based on one of the worst vampire movies ever made. still it could have been better, there were a few funny moments in the film (only recognisable if you watch the twilight films first though)however i found that the majority of the humour was too obvious and crude to be really funny and simply portrayed a sense of immaturity and lack of imagination from both director and writer. however the actors made a commendable effort (especially the girl who mimicked Kirsten Stewarts appalling acting perfectly) its a shame they were considerably let down by the scathing incompetence of the director...the movie had potential...but in the end became obsolete and pointless. a real disappointment
Anacondas 4: Trail of Blood (2009)
this anaconda should be in the Olympics!!!!
seriously though, it should, after all its no mean feat for a limbless reptile to out run a jeep! because in this pathetic excuse of a movie that is exactly what happens! the anaconda also seemed to have an in built sensor to detect dumb humans since where ever they are..the snake just magically turns up to wreak havoc. and to top it off the "anaconda" doesn't even look like one,has the director not seen the 1st two films? or at least googled an anaconda before making this film? evidently not! add that to an appalling script, bad editing,boring and underdeveloped characters,rubbish CGI and virtually no story and you have..well..Anaconda 4!! what was really hilarious though were the death scenes..o my gosh! the reaction of trained assassins when confronted with a 90ft snake is to shoot into the air(even though the snake is about 3ft away) and scream..then die,since killing the damn thing would have been too clever. what i also do not understand is how every character can "hear" the snake arriving at some point in the film even though no sound is audible on screen and see the snake and do nothing about it! so overall this film was a great let down, an embarrassing pile of trash that fails by far to emulate the excellent first two movies. frankly counting each blade of grass on my lawn would have been more exciting than this film
Cloverfield (2008)
good CGI...shame you couldn't see a damn thing!
OK i will admit this film had the potential to be a good movie had the director sorted out the lousy plot, numerous inconsistencies (such as how a camcorder can survive a nuclear bomb), cheesy stereotypical script and of course the *shudder* camera work. i personally think that it the appalling camera work that totally destroyed any chance this film had of impressing, the creature was barely visible due to it's size and the limited scope of the camera so whenever anything exciting was actually happening..all that was visible was the pavement and the actor's feet, exciting? you bet it was all those running feet really built up suspense..not!. In fact it was so shaky and vague that i had no idea that one of the main characters had died until 10 minutes later when the leading male characters says so. overall i was left wondering why the director even bothered to use CGI, the camera movements were so shaky a big cardboard cut out would have sufficed for the creature! needless to say i would not recommend this film for anything other than burning.watch Godzilla instead...at least you will know what is happening
Clash of the Titans (1981)
one word...AWFUL!!!
I only watched this film a few years ago and was therefore aware that the CGI was going to be bad due to the age of the film, therefore on that count it can be forgiven. However the appalling acting and quite frankly anticlimax ending made me squirm in irritation. Firstly when the kraken is about to eat the princes our main character who is supposed to "save" her arrives late, and when he does arrive he gets knocked flat on his backside anyway, leaving it to his ridiculous cuckoo clock of a side kick to save the day!(what the heck does that have to do with the myth anyway??)
the acting was poorer than poor, which there is really no excuse for since i have seen plenty of films from the 60s, 70s and 80s which have had great acting, and all of the characters are weak, pathetic and completely unconvincing(check out the scene with the "hero" and Medusa comical!)
basically it was one of the biggest wastes of my time and certainly not worthy of the title "classic"
for the sake of your sanity DO NOT WATCH!!!!
Valentine's Day (2010)
and the point of this film was?????
first off i did not want to see this film as i am no fan what so ever of romantic comedies, given half a chance i would have charged straight in to see the wolf man,however two friends of mine were dying to see it so i thought why spoil it for them? what beggars belief is that despite the fact that i was expecting a load of sentimental tripe i still managed to be disappointed and down right horrified by the utter waste of time this film was.
there were about ten different stories all muddled up in an incomprehensible mix of unlikely love affairs, instant breakups followed by even more instant makeups, sloppy teenage relationships and awful jokes followed by the usual happy clappy "believe in yourself and everything will be OK" ending.
What was even more infuriating is the fact that the film is riddled with people jumping into bed with anyone every ten seconds e.g. Anne Hathaway's character has sex with someone before they even consider starting a relationship and the only character's who actually have a little self respect are portrayed as morons, hereby implying that the only way to have a good relationship is to basically have a few one night stands until Mr Right comes along (or until you get an std but they don't tell you that). apparently this film is aimed at teenagers(females in particular), well i am 17 and a girl and i was thoroughly disgusted at the complete lack of any good values portrayed in this film.
i felt physically sick after leaving the cinema and i would warn all those who are considering wasting their hard earned money on this piece of corny trash PLEASE PLEASE DO NOT WATCH!!!!!