stuart-193 Reviews

Avatar: The Way of Water (2022)

Again, people still seem to think that a rating of 1 is fair? - The truth about this film

[10/10 · 5 April 2023]

The long awaited sequel to Avatar has hit the home market after grossing $2.257bn at the box office with some territories not yet completed. That means, if you give it around 1% to compensate for inflation over the period of 13 years, the franchise has grossed some $5.4bn for an outlay of around $700m. I'd call that good investment.

OK, to the nitty gritty - should you rent or buy this for home viewing or wait for it to hit Disney+ for free and not line the deep pockets of Cameron's Lightstorm Entertainments? If you liked the first one, you are going to like this for it's visuals alone - but is it worth paying? Some people here have given it 1/10, which is a very unfair mark for any film as you'll see - I now usually automatically mark films 10 if there are more than five 1's as I believe that no mainstream movies can be marked lower than a 4/10 (poor) or a 3/10 (bad) since there must be some redeeming features which make them watchable (5/10). If you don't watch the film all the way through, you shouldn't mark it (according to Barry Norman - well know film critic). Extreme low marking (1/10) fails the whole system and can only be counteracted by an extreme mark of 10 to balance the equation. Here's the breakdown in my opinion and why I came out with a 8/10.

1. Script and concept We already know that the story of Avatar is a relatively simple one along the lines of Dances With Wolves/Pocahontas/The Trail Of Tears/The Emerald Forest, etc, so it's nothing new. However, Cameron has made it his own with his blue world of creatures in a new situation. To be fair, you really can't go wrong with this concept at all, so he simply took the next step, rightly or wrongly in the eyes of the voting public - there seems to be mixed reviews, but many feel the plot in The Way of Water was contrived. Personally I didn't feel it was terrible, and there is the fact that it is a continuation of the story. So, I would tend towards saying it is OK, which is a 6/10.

2. Direction Cameron is one of the greatest film directors that has ever lived - the direction is superb, so you have to give it 10/10.

3. Acting Again, some of the world's best actors are in this franchise, so there is no issues here. The actors didn't let the side down at all but in some places I felt it was a little forced - 9/10 .

4. Technical aspects (camera, sound, editing, etc) - well ... it was stunning in every way, like the first film, but better. 10/10

5. SFX - Truthfully, it was flawless from the capture of the performances to the incredible animations, the like that hasn't been seen before in terms of quality. I watched the first film before watching the second and I was blown away by the improvements in technical visuals -- 10/10

6. My personal feeling - what niggled me throughout the entire movie is that the original antagonist in the first movie had been killed off at the end. Despite the fact that Stephen Lang is fabulous at paying the bad guy/hard-ass in movies he was one of the best baddies in the modern eras of film and the explanation for his return was not entirely unreasonable, I felt it was a mistake ... so I'm docking the score buy 1 mark.

Totals - 45 out of 50 for the marking, which is 9/10, less 1/10 for my little gripe, which I considered a major flaw in the concept = 8/10.

Now you could have different ideas about the way you feel those marks should be apportioned, but if you were fair this film could never go below 7/10 (good). I personally was considering that, since the concept of the human boy rescuing his engineered "avatar" father was a little over the top in my opinion, but I didn't feel I should be the one to change the director's vision of the movie since he knows where he's going with this concept for the next film which is apparently already in the can ...

So my real mark is 8/10, though I could see how it might be 7/10 ... but absolutely no less than 7/10 (which is good). However, since the 1/10 brigade is out in force, I have to mark it 10.

Troll (2022)

Ignore the naysayers and make up your own mind ...

[10/10 · 6 February 2023]

Again, I feel I have to point out that not everyone is the same, and whilst some people might not like this or any other film for that matter, giving it a score of "1", which is received for only the worst films (see a film called Dark Wolf - that merits a 1/10), and is very unhelpful to others who might want to watch it. Indeed, if you do, then the only way to counteract that unfair mark is to leave a 10, so it balances at least one score of "1" ... which I have done.

Since I have said the above, I suppose I'll have to qualify my opinion, so here goes.

Films can be critiqued by considering technical and other aspects of how the story is told. Using Troll for an example ...

1. Plot and script - the plot is pretty simple: an ancient being from folklore wakes up after a millennia or so, finds he is no longer in friendly territory and wreaks havoc when the new tenants of the land try to kill him. The script is going to describe how we get from A to B, and it centres around one Professor Nora Tidermann, a palaeontologist who is called in when the government requires advice as to how to deal with it. Of course, they largely ignore her advice and all hell breaks loose as the leaders of Norway choose a more direct approach ... nothing new here, but it was entertaining enough given the subject matter, though of course one has to suspend belief in many aspects, including how governments actually work in these situations, otherwise it won't be entertaining at all. Hence a whole load of plot holes, which isn't unusual when you're dealing with mythical monsters. Given that it requires a suspension of belief (which those who gave it a 1/10 clearly cannot cope with), but I am somewhat in agreement as there were a couple of examples over licensing, meaning the situation was not believable at all, though these were few and could be overlooked in the grand picture. I would say the script merits a 6/10 (that's an OK in my book). Basically this is not Mario Puzo's Godfather, but then that's not a fair comparison.

2. Direction. The director clearly understood that this was a monster movie and treated it like one. It was handled well, with no out of the box deviations to complicate the main thrust of the concept. I would have done the same thing under the circumstances and that leads me to believe that budgetary constraints were where decisions to focus on action rather than relationships were made. Not that you really felt that the characters weren't fleshed out enough for you to identify with them, it's just something that could be washed over beyond the obvious relationships. I'd mark it as a 7/10

3. The technical aspects of making the film from the script. These are the lighting, camerawork, sound, SFX, etc. All very good. The troll is very good. 8/10

4. Acting. Very good. No issues 8/10

5. Music. This is more important than you think. It was no Dances with Wolves soundtrack, but again it was very good and fitted well. 8/10

6. Editing - again, very good. The film didn't lag or anything, so again 8/10

So now an overall, very 6+7+(4x8)= 45. Divide by 6 and you have 7.5/10.

My point for those that always give 1/10, is that scoring as low as that isn't helpful to others or indeed fair to the movie itself. There is no way this film is a 1/10. You could have the opinion that it might be a 5 or 6, but absolutely it cannot be less than 5, which is "watchable" in my book.

So, a plea to those who simply go for the extremes - don't ... be fair, think about it and compare it to other films before you mark it at a 1/10.

Viking Wolf (2022)

It's about time ...

[8/10 · 5 February 2023]

The problem with the werewolf films is they generally fail to stand up to the well known . That's usually a budget issue, resulting in a poor script, average acting, so so directing and the lack of the money shot -- the obligatory transformation scene. Basically, you can usually see the money running out as the film progresses, leaving no bite for the third act.

Enter Netflix, it would seem their pockets are deep enough to make a worthy addition with Vikinggulven (Viking Wolf). Actually, this is a surprisingly good addition to the genre, a perfectly fine plot which wasn't too caught up in subterfuge, which is usually a bad sign in werewolf films, so no guessing as to who the wolf protagonist is, just tension as to when they will figure it out for themselves so we can start with the real fun ... the wolf.

Excellent CGI has been around for nearly 30 years now. First of all dinosaurs, then meteors and space aliens, but they still didn't have the rendering skill to produce hair, and those wolves in the late 90's through the early 2000's didn't really look right unless there was a mix of traditional effects and CGI. However, now they've got that one down even for lower medium budget films, and the wolves are acceptable enough. This one was well conceived, the transformation scene and the resultant animal is good enough to pass the test.

The rest of it: a reasonably decent plot, good acting and a perfectly fine job by the director leads to a suitable third act for any werewolf film buff with plenty of blood and guts and many minutes of onscreen wolfery which should satisfy even the genres most ardent critics.

Of course, there will always be those that require levels of perfection that even Netflix budgets won't deliver, hence the propensity to score 1/10, which should only really be given in dire and rare circumstances though I see it all the time, even with even big budget movies that can't be scored less than a 5/10 (= watchable in my book). So to balance that out, I will be scoring 10 for everything that I think is worth more than a 5/10 - hence my official score for this is a 10, though I think I would have scored 8 in reality.

Whatever the case, give it a shot. If you like werewolf films, you won't be disappointed.

The Princess (I) (2022)

I really don't know how much more the naysayers want from a film

[9/10 · 15 December 2022]

Don't be too swayed by the naysayers, which there appear to be many indeed to my surprise.

Sometimes films are purely action based, like John Wick. Sometimes they are slow burners and sometimes they are something in between. This is definitely the former. There is nothing more to it that that.

Joey King, known for an eclectic mixture of drama and more up tempo work, does a fine job of not being the damsel in distress. Rather the opposite when a ruthless lord tries to gain a kingdom's throne via marriage. The young princess bride to be has other ideas it would seem. The ensuing hour and twenty minutes or so is a full on action rollercoaster which is paced well and executed perfectly by the director.

Look. If you don't like action flicks, this isn't for you. There is one plot line only and it truly delivers in that sense. Think of it more if a martial arts film set in England's feudal past, say 950-1200, with a purpose. The concept isn't complex and it's for pure entertainment purposes only. I'd you do that, it won't disappoint. If you try to embue it with drama other that the obvious requirements of an action film, you'll have missed the point and you'll become one of those aforesaid naysayers who expect far too much of the plot these days.

The Hating Game (2021)

Terrible script, but why did I give it 8?

[8/10 · 14 June 2022]

This film has a half baked script, average supporting cast, TV movie direction and a less than interesting storyline. So why did it merit a 8/10 when I considered switching it off after 10 minutes?

Because the two leading actors were captivating. I mean, talk about dragging a poor movie concept out of the fire with sheer acting talent and screen presence.

Lucy Hale is very easy on the eye, but she's not just a pretty face. Her timing and delivery is top notch, somewhat reminiscent of Kathryn Heigl in her reactions to Austin Stowell's brooding straight man role. I found him to be a less annoying version of Ryan Reynolds, effortlessly allowing his character to be the love hate Mr Darcy for Hale's up tight but this time boiling hot Emma. Talk about walking out of the water scene, both actors were steaming hot and freezing cold all at once. In fact he was so good at that stoic look, it was like watching the new Hugh Grant.

It's been a long time since I've written a review in here. I think we'll see a lot more of those two in the future. I'm sure they can do more than just small time comedy. Bring it on - let's see what you can do.

Queen & Slim (2019)

Prophetic road movie with heart

[9/10 · 6 October 2020]

A must see. I'm rather partial to road movies, but having seen this after the Black Lives Matter marches this year, it was particularly poignant. Superb performances, good pace, great soundtrack too. Enjoy ... if you can with all that's going on in real life.

Ready Player One (2018)

A fitting revival of the virtual world movie

[10/10 · 10 August 2020]

There has been many movies about virtual reality, the most obvious place to start would be Tron. I started my teenage years in 1980, so I was literally there for all of the attempts to make film and TV "virtual world" material, and yes, I saw Tron on its first release. There have been many since then, Tron laying the ground for the TV series and films that came from there on. Most of them never really hit the spot, they were either too much of a clone of Tron, or too far from the virtual reality world to be classed in it's league. Whatever the case, they were largely poor imitations of the grandaddy of all of them. Ready Player One breaks that mould, a fitting tribute to the original idea, referencing many if the greatest movies of all time within the story which adds to the fun and effortlessly breaking away form the virtual reality to anchor you to the real world action. I don't often give 10/10, but this really does deserve it.

Underwater (2020)

Why the hate for this film?

[9/10 · 4 June 2020]

Simply. You know what you're going to get with this movie and it delivers on all levels. I watched the trailer for it, decided to watch it and I was not disappointed.

The 2/10 critics say there was no back story. You should have been watching he first 2 minutes instead of fiddling with your phone or arranging your drink and popcorn. That was the back story.

5/10 critics say there was no let up. There were, but when mayhem is going on all sound you I'm pretty sure they would be few and far between. I was paced perfectly IMHO. Anyway. I expected a roller coaster and I got one. Would you expect breathing space if your deep sea drilling platform suddenly blew up? No pun intended there.

For those who haven't seen it. Don't go in expecting a long drawn out film like the abyss (which in my opinion is a masterpiece of film making). But it's pretty much 3 hours long (extended version). This is a short 1hr 30min high octane action flick with a creature to boot. It all makes sense. The acting is very good. The effects are excellent. The script is perfectly good, the direction is fabulous, the technical aspects are brilliant considering the complexity of making films in water, the creature is frightening, the end is surprising and good. It keeps you glued to it for the entire time. The editing is perfect. Those that thought it was boring clearly missed salient information as they were distracted with their own stuff and as a result didn't feel it hung together well. I kind of understand gay in Coronavirus world you might be watching on your TV. Yes. You need a projector and 120inch screen for films like this else they look dark and you don't necessarily get the full effect. Don't be fooled by 4K 75 inch screens. Still way too small. Pay a little extra and get a proper cinema experience with surround sound and then you'll be able to appreciate these kinds of films properly in you own home. Else - see it at the cinema before writing critiques

The Predator (2018)

To you 1/10 raters ... Seriously?

[7/10 · 23 May 2020]

I have had a long dislike of black and white ratings on IMDB. Like the rest of life, things aren't usually black and white. Life is lived in shades of grey where extremes are rarely the case. And that is how it should be when you are trying to help others decide if they should see a movie or not. It should be rare that a film gets a 1/10 or a 10/10 - these extremes simply don't help. I scored this as a 7 ... here's why

1. Screenwriting for the genre - 7/10 - the plot was good and the premise was fine - there was no confusion over the storyline or muddling of the information, the film continued through the 3 acts seamlessly with intent and purpose - hence a very good screenplay. 2. Direction - 8/10 - Shane Black is a rather good director and steered the film along nicely keeping pace and energy and giving us a break where needed. no confusion or terrible plot holes 3. Editing - 8/10. There were some really good points where things could get confusing with the pace of the movie - the editing was well up to standard and kept everything tight and on target for the third act which was surprisingly good for a poorly rated movie on IMDB 4. Acting - 8/10 - c'mon guys, the cast were really trying to get you into this this movie and make you love it. I've only seem a couple of the cast before, but they were really very good for the genre and they did a great job whilst making it really quite believable in the grand scheme of what would or wouldn't be believable that is. I'm pretty sure they'll get a lot more work on the back of this, even the kid was quite good in an adult film 5. SFX - 8/10 - very good, what can I say - anyone can do this on their MacBook these days, but there were no gaps or moments when you thought it wasn't good enough and poor SFX weren't the reason to notice any problem with the movie, hence a very good (8/10) 6. Camerawork, lighting etc - 8/10 - same as above - professional and good enough for any blockbuster you might want to name. 7. Music - same again 8/10 - I mean, why wouldn't it be? 8. Concept - 6/10 - Nothing new here, its OK - I suppose Shane Black was wanting to tie up some loose ends from the other films, viz. the way the predators changed in the various films and why they were doing what they did, which he gave a reasonable answer to I suppose, hence 6 instead of 5 9. General overall cohesiveness - this score is for the whole thing in terms of its reason for being (a sequel in this case, how it fits into the genre SciFi, how it fares against the concept fro the time of making it, etc, etc). 6/10 - because its not particularly well received at the moment and the other films have been somewhat poorly received and haven't been as well exectuted as they could have been. 10. My own make for enjoyment, etc - 7/10

If you add them all up and divide by 10 you get 7.5 - but round dow for !MDB = 7/10

If you think otherwise then let me know because you're not helping with the extreme scores 1/10 or 10/10

Serenity (2005)

Make sure you watch Firefly the series before you watch this

[9/10 · 8 October 2019]

When this came out n 2005, I saw it on DVD release - it was kind of OK, but somewhat weird and I felt like it was missing something. Still, it was OK, so I scored it accordingly as a 6/10 (the score I give for films when I think they could be better for whatever reason - in this case, it didn't make enough sense to deserve a better mark). That's entirely because I hadn't watched the series first - which you really need to do as it won't make sense otherwise. Now I ve watched it agin having seen the series, and it makes perfect sense, and its excellent. My bad, I didn't even realise it was part of a series until a couple of years ago - so I've re-marked it accordingly

Firefly (2002–2003)

Cannot believe they cancelled this

[10/10 · 8 October 2019]

The you first start watching Firefly, especially if you are watching it 17 years after it was first aired like I am, you do feel it's a little "old". But bear with it, because you quickly become fascinated with the characters and then you fall in love with every one of them - all nine. The concept is simple, the execution is perfect. The mood is generally light hearted, but the more you identify with the characters, the depth of emotion you feel with them on their journey is quite marked. By episode 5, you are thinking this must be one of the best TV shows of all time - and surely it is, as it has a huge following and a high mark from over 200,00o viewers only reserved for the greatest shows ever. Yes, there are other TV shows that have reached higher marks, but they came along much later when the new breed of TV started. Firefly is old-school at its finest. Watch and enjoy !!

Bohemian Rhapsody (2018)

Rocking the queen fans

[9/10 · 8 November 2018]

If you're a queen fan then this is definitely for you. Otherwise, the cast is competent and the technicals are as would be expected. There is some licence from actual events but for entertainment value only. Rami Malek needs some kind of award for this, probably won't get one but he brought Freddy to life again for one more lap of honour.

Basically - worth going to see even if you weren't around to see it happen for real or they weren't you're favourite band - regardless, they raised the roof wherever they played and Freddy was a legend and you should see that performance again on the big screen.

The Open House (2018)

"Overly long and baggy"

[4/10 · 27 October 2018]

Netflix are making a lot of films lately - most of them are quite good - unfortunately this is not one of them.

The basic concept is one which should have been meaty enough to provide plenty of plot twists but, despite quite a capable cast, the directors fail to deliver any punches at key points during the movie preferring to meander aimlessly, apparently exploring the mundane human interest story instead of getting to the point. Perhaps too many cooks ??

The run time is 1 hr 37 minutes, and whilst this isn't a long film, to quote Mark Kermode, it is overly long and baggy, so much so you could probably have left the 37 minutes on the cutting room floor.

Unfortunately, it makes for a poor effort in a time when poor movies are not suffered by the viewing public. The only thing it has going for it is the fact it is shot beautifully but this does not make up for the lack of pace.

Reign of Fire (2002)

Dragons rule !!

[9/10 · 25 August 2018]

All Indy filmmakers should take heed of the lessons set by Rob Bowman in this beast of a movie.

I first saw it on video - but later I had the good fortune to see it on the big screen too. For a action flick with a tight budget, it feels more substantial - the director's experience on the X-files is plain to see as he keeps the pace moving hitting every key point with well executed action sequences whilst the extremely competent lead and supporting cast members drive the story forward making for a truly exciting monster movie.

It's a master class of the right way to spend your money to get the best out of the budget - the dragons are still some of the best on film. There are of course some compromises made in terms of plot holes but they are acceptable for the genre.

I was surprised at the time that the reception was so bad - the advertising budget wasn't the responsibility of the director or the cast - and even though it is now 16 years old and the cast have gone in to greater things, it still stands up as one of the best dragon movies ever made. Everyone should see it if you like a good Saturday night action film.

Star Wars: Episode VIII - The Last Jedi (2017)

To all those giving this less than 4/10

[8/10 · 10 April 2018]

If you hated the film, that's absolutely fine - but it can't get anything less than 4/10. Why? Because you have to look at the whole production with honesty and be fair. Break it down into its basic components and come up with something sensible. For example: For a scale of 1-10

1. Script - you can give this 1/10 if you want. I gave it 6/10 which in my scale is OK - largely because the target audience is kids from the age of 8 upwards so you have to give it some latitude for that. 2. Acting - all round pretty good considering the material. So 7/10 = good in my scale. 3. Direction: not as good as I could have been but still good - another 7 4. Camera work - here's where it excels. 9/10 = excellent 5. Editing - well - brilliant again another 9 6. Score - John Williams iconic themes - 10/10 - superb 7. Special fx - pretty impressive 8/10 = very good (cos we've seen it all before'in the last one and so many films are impressive these days) 8. Personal feelings and enjoyment - for me it's an 8 as it's so iconic and I grew up with it all.

Therefore 64/80 = overall 8/10

As the technical stuff is so good there's no way it can get less than 40/80 so you guys giving 1-3 out of 10 are being unreasonable. For me 1/10 is reserved only for the absolute worst movies ever - and not this - even if you hated it with a vengeance that's a personal view and not a realistic one and very unhelpful to those who want to know if they will enjoy it and should pay to see it.

Night Wolf (2010)

The new lease of life for Brit horror

[6/10 · 23 October 2010]

Not exactly in the same league as Dog Soldiers or American Werewolf, but also not having the same budget as those titles, this little flick shows budding directors that you can get released with a low budget horror.

Apparently shot in 6 weeks and edited in no time at all on a shoestring, if you like werewolves, then this will be for you. You're going to have to ignore the wooden planks who were cast in this ... but they do get picked off in style which is very satisfying. The Director picks up the pace nicely after introducing the aforementioned wooden planks to us and the suspense is kept at a no nodding off level with gusto.

For those who like a bit of gore, there are some nice gnarly bits but not too overboard - the creature is acceptable for a low budget flick and the script, whilst no great shakes and somewhat predictable in places, is more than adequate to keep you from snoozing between the teeth gnashing and the inevitable running sequences

The downside - you are likely to become annoyed with the whining actors. The lead should have been handled by someone less, erm, "nice" and we could have done without the overall feeling of a made for TV one off. However, that aside, if you like werewolves and you want to support British film, you will be entertained.

I gave it 6/10, which is an OK on my scale - I wanted to give it 7/10 (good) but overall performances from the cast could have been better even on a low budget. Still - a commendable effort from writers and director who will go far.

Alien vs. Predator (2004)

Gets better each time you watch it - extended version best

[7/10 · 11 August 2010]

Like many movies of its genre, this film is exactly as expected, so its never going to get the greatest accolades or win any Oscars. The first time I saw AVP, I didn't rate it that highly, though I thought it was OK. However, having seen it once or twice on TV I began to warm to it, so when I saw a cheap copy on Blu ray going in Blockbuster, I decided to buy it. The disc has two version of the film, the theatrical release and an extended version.

In terms of the overall feel of the film both are similar, though the extended version does have some additional "explanations" which the theatrical version leaves you wondering about. Now I have seen this film 4 times, my initial feelings of disappointment have changed to thinking this film should rate around 7/10 overall - it certainly delivers what is expected with above average effects and storyline for its franchise mix.

So don't feel put off by the low score on IMDb. If you like Alien and Predator and have a blu ray player then get the extended version - you won't be disappointed. Go on, give it a chance

Star Trek (2009)

Set phasers to stunning

[9/10 · 11 May 2009]

Reload the photon torpedoes - we're going warp 9 with J J Abrams Star Trek.

Action packed from the beginning, Abrams has not forgotten what makes audiences interested as he also allows us to become invested emotionally with the concept within the first 3 minutes. Then, never dropping the pace, he takes us on a roller coaster ride through the galaxy ingeniously re-introducing some of the most well known and well loved characters in TV and film history with an insight to their beginnings.

As with many other "remakes", all is not totally different in Abrams Trek, but a new twist will no doubt breathe vibrant new life into these fabulous characters once again for many more outings to come.

So. Dust off your star fleet uniforms, get your Spock ears out, sit back and enjoy arguably the best franchise reboot this decade so far (notwithstanding the yet to be released Terminator Salvation).

Candy (2006)

Choose life ! Possible spoilers!!!

[7/10 · 11 April 2007]

Candy, played skilfully by the beautiful Abi Cornish; nice enough on the outside but without her daily dose the reality of her life drives her to deep clinical depression. Dan, her man, the mighty Heath Ledger, wants to do the right thing but the drugs don't help ... however is his addiction really what we initially think it is?

As with many relationships, the two play off each other with harmony and discord, the weight of the acting developing a real sense of belonging and distance as their love turns to dependency and then to the inevitable loathing when the crutch of the heroin is taken away.

Technically this was a great script, directed well and flawlessly executed by the lead characters and the support cast. The Aussies are doing these movies well. If you like depth of characters then you'll love this. If you are looking for something that depicts real heroin addiction in its nastiest form, look more for Trainspotting and the like, this is a love story which will draw you in if you let it. However, whilst substantial, no Oscar nominations here. Instead of really delving into the horror and the tenderness to produce a masterpiece, the movie as a whole fails to deliver the killer blow.

Personally I felt for the useless Dan more than for Candy, no doubt the onlooker will identify with each based on gender. You will find yourself becoming an armchair social worker as you watch helplessly on ... no happy endings here, but ain't that real life?

The Covenant (2006)

Supernatural hits the big screen

[5/10 · 11 April 2007]

If you like the TV series Supernatural, you'll likely appreciate this. However, without the development of a continuing series, the script in The Covenant doesn't deliver the same punch over 90 minutes compared to the 45 minute TV show. The plot is popcorn simple, probably too simple to pad out a feature, so character depth and background is not big on the menu here unlike its TV counterparts.

Having said that, the direction good enough for the genre, the acting is OK and the specials are nice and expensive and in the same vein as Underworld - glossy. Still, a lacking of real substance and the "teen" style doesn't really lift it further than TV, which probably explains why it missed mainstream cinema distribution in the UK, going straight to DVD in most regions. Why 6/10? Because it was watchable enough.

Lady in the Water (2006)

Fairy tale with the Night Shamalan touch

[7/10 · 16 January 2007]

You know what I really like about IMDb? You actually hear what real people think about movies, unlike some other review sites I could mention where the critics get to slam good flicks like this beautifully told little fairy tale that Shamalan wrote for his kids.

If you let it, this film works on a number of levels; if you're looking for emotion it has bucket loads with a dash of comedy and a scare or two, all delivered with the unique technical skills that Shamalan has developed over his 7 movies. If you liked the 80's "Company of Wolves" you'll love this. However, be prepared to engross yourself in a child-like fantasy and don't take it too seriously, over analyse or apply adult values because you'll run the risk of being disappointed like most of the critics on rotten toms - they clearly don't get it - I'll bet they didn't believe in Santa when they were kids ... shame on them!

Alien 3 (1992)

Alien 3 - directors cut a cut above

[7/10 · 10 November 2004]

When I first saw this movie, I can remember being really quite disappointed - it seemed to be incoherent, not very scary and definitely not worthy compared to the previous movies. Now I know why - the director was clearly overruled by the money men and his film wasn't the one released in 1992. Oh yes, it was the same actors and he shot the scenes, but someone took an axe into the cutting room. The directors cut doesn't just add a couple of extra scenes, its a completely different movie with real tension, grit and true horror befitting the Alien franchise. This movie has now gone from being the worst of the four to equal second. Thank god for DVD!!

The Grudge (2004)

Creeeeeeeeepy

[8/10 · 10 November 2004]

Undeterred by the less than favourable reviews, I decided to go and see The Grudge. As I haven't seen the Japanese version I had no pre-conceptions and, save for the reviews and TV ads, not much idea about the story - was I going to be disappointed? This is one of those movies that critics hate (I'll never understand why that is), but the public at large give the thumbs up to. The Grudge is not your average shocker and not so obvious as to make it tedious despite a relatively simple script. Geller does a fine job of looking scared witless and the monster justifies all the tension the director builds. This is a very creepy movie ... completely undeserving of the slating that it has been given in the press - I give it 8/10 . Well worth a look.