| Movie | Rating | Review | Date | Your Rating | Match | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yi boh laai beng duk (Ebola Syndrome) - Unrated | February 4, 2009 | N/A | ||||
| Tras el cristal (In a Glass Cage) - Unrated | said to be as fucked up as Salo. We'll see | February 4, 2009 | N/A | |||
| Untraceable - R |
It has a bit of pro-internet censorship theme. Seriously, I haven't seen a more elaborate yet unconvincing argument for net censorship. The only scary part of this movie is the glimpse into the life of Feds who track net crime. Good thing they're too busy with pedos and scammers to mess with downloaders AKA the common pirate such as myself. I actually watched the movie on a site where pirates can upload rips to stream (stagevu.com) and some of the scenes were so scary that I did occasionally consider closing the browser (lol jj I know they ain't interested in me). The trailer gives away the film's final act, not like it isn't totally predictable anyway. Something the film does well is that it captures how much net tech has entered our lives. It also provides a decent backstory for the killer's motive. Truth is, the world is just as sick and shitty as it has always been, but this film sort of pens it on the (uncontrolled) internet. All the net is is humanity evolved. We would crave to watch death no matter what; the net just does what it does for anything - makes it easier and more accessible. Frankly, that's a damn good thing. What people use technology for reflects the reality of human nature. And we really like violence - ALL people, not just Americans as the film points directly at the American net user (all non-US IPs can't access the killing site directly). I am going off topic here because this movie has just pissed me off with its "message". I WANT to see violence. I crave it as essential part of my being. Violence happens whether or not there is a camera fixed on it. It is better for us to see what happens than not. I truly believe, because I know it's true for me, that if people couldn't watch violence, they'd be more likely to go out and be violent. Yes, that's right - I'm saying that watching violence keeps us from committing it. Our natural appetite for violence is easily satiated by viewing simulated or the rare captured real violence. Those who have insatiable appetites for violence may be made "more creative" by watching violent films and other media, as the infamous saying goes (from Scream), but it doesn't make killers out of the greater general bulk of viewers. For example, if this were a real life story, I would not visit the site while the killings were taking place because I would not want to contribute to the demise of a random person. I would, however, watch the clip after on another site whose host had captured the film and was offering it free of guilt/charge. lmao Oh and speaking of this film's violence, to put it in context of what I just said - it has NOT sated my primal human need for violence BY ANY STRETCH. Pedestrian surfers, read that last statement like this: THIS MOVIE HAS CRAPPY KILL SCENES AND NO GORE. IT's LIKE TAME SAW. |
February 4, 2009 | N/A | |||
| Stuck - R |
After a brilliant montage of nursing home living set to thudding rap music, this film's story begins outrageously bleak and desperate, and certainly doesn't improve with each passing sequence. Stephen Rea plays Tom, a man who in one day has lost his apartment, been lost in the paper shuffle at unemployment, and now faces his first night as a homeless person. Mena Suvari plays Brandi, nursing attendant to the elderly by day and party girl by night. She too has a great day cleaning an incontinent Alzheimer's patient (and it is ALL the way graphic) just before she finds out that she's gonna have to pull another Saturday to help secure a promotion. Brandi just wants to party and Tom just wants to find somewhere to stay. After the club, Brandi is headed home and Tom, recently ejected from a nearby park and pushing his squeaky new - and fleeting- badge of homelessness, is seeking shelter for the night when Brandi provides her windshield for Tom to lodge in. I can remember when this happened - and actually, watching this film - where Brandi is driving around and there are no other cars to be seen - the events seem incredulous and beyond believability for fiction. But all the while the panging reality is that this actually happened and probably looked just as surreal and improbable as it is depicted. Upon arriving home, Brandi indulges in a night of explicit one on one partying with her boyfriend. In the morning, homegirl calls a cab to pick her up for work the next morning and !!!HOLY SHIT!!! John Dunsworth of Trailer Park Boys Mr. Lahey infamy is the cabbie!!! (If you don't know the TPB, well... get all the episodes now! I literally yelled with delight when I saw 'Mr. Lahey' in this serious flick, but back to the story) Meanwhile, Tom is still STUCK in the windshield of Brandi's car, in her garage, and he is conscious but obviously injured beyond capability of major movement. The film stays pretty firm to the real timeline at the outset (visit http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,90498,00.html for the real life case timeline) and Gordon even timestamps events. After the big incident, the movie strays far from reality for dramatic effect especially in terms of how long the victim remains conscious and what he is able to do to cry for help. [[That concludes the minibits of spoilage]] and there is plenty more astounding developments as the story takes a turn towards (extreme) dark comedy. It is fantastic to see Stuart Gordon, who has such a schlocky history beginning with Re-Animator, doing some realistic and truly intelligent work in the first half of the film. I saw much development in his Masters of Horror episodes (Dreams in the Witch House and The Black Cat) that I started to really respect him as a director, but I never expected this astounding level of skill. I'll certainly have to check out his other recent not-totally-horror forays King of the Ants and Edmond (written by David Mamet). Of course because this is Gordon all the red stuff is done just right and the sound mix fits the amount of pain and will cause as much (or for me more) flinching than the gory visuals. Most fucked up highlight: Brandi and ALL her actions |
February 3, 2009 | N/A | |||
| Cannibal (Diary of a Cannibal ) - Unrated | (from what I read) the worst version of the Armin Meiwes story | February 3, 2009 | N/A | |||
| Eden Lake - R |
The introductory car scene is cinematically identical to Funny Games. On deciding to confront the kids, "If everyone said that, where would we be?" Leave it to a fuckin Englishman to be so damn... English about it, almost deserves it. Still, with this kind of proactive approach, I'm expecting a fighting couple for a chance. I've gotta do a hit by hit analysis as I've the browser open; expect many SPOILERS. First mistake was to be sorry about the dog; if he had acted all hard and used it as an opportunity to pound the lead little bastard, they might have stopped out of respect for equally reckless ego-driven violence. And then once they get the car, "I can't see!", right so how about slowing it down a bit; they couldn't catch a slow car on foot right away. The knifing scene: and my case for keeping guns legal stands strong; I'd rather a few quick trigger happy caps than this kiddie medieval torture shite. And are we just NOW checking our mobile service bars to concoct a clever Blackberry trick? The youngest kid Cooper is the same actor who plays the central character in This is England and he is clearly retreading dramatic territory with this scene which I'm sure the producer was thrilled to have happen. It's always best to give up your hiding spot the moment your boyfriend yells out to you to run and the mean little kiddies all pause from their torture sesh to peer about. Okay that is WAY too convenient for the plot to have our fleeing heroine step on a massive spike in the middle of bumfuck nowhere and cry out uncontrollably. "Can you please just show me the way?" How about can you please just whip out your mobile and call the police? What happens next...damn that leader kid is FUCKED. I guess tit for tit... random screwed-overs leads to one decent break in a grotty bin. Of course Cooper gets the "oops"...sympathy scene. Am a bit annoyed at the stereotypical "battle paint" look had from the roll in the bin. Isn't this the fence scene from Ils? (just before the heroine is "saved" by a passing car) Wow I don't think ever before in film history has killing a kid been so restorative for the audience. Though predictable and too clearly contrived in plot, this film is sufficiently fucked up and realistic about it to earn an extra half star. "Most fucked up" highlight: "Is it warm?" through "I'll burn him instead", and also the ending |
February 3, 2009 | N/A | |||
| Teeth - R |
This is why parents need to speak to their kids about sex: to insure that your kid doesn't have monster genitals and think it's normal because they have not been exposed to any proper sexual education. This is also why a hottie twink teenage boy shouldn't try raping his virgin and celibate girlfriend - he'll get his dick bitten off and the only sexual option possible after that will be to present his hot cornhole to me for proper deflowering (Yes kids, attempting hetero sex before marriage leads to penile loss and gay butt sex!). So this movie is obviously the story of "what if vagina dentata were a living problem for someone", and I hoped such a film might at least flirt with an NC-17 rating (it does in terms of showing penises). I do appreciate that the film explains the ancient anthropological myth, but my problem is with lack of graphic depiction. So we get to see a bit of chewed off cock early on, a spurting half-eaten meal at 1hr10min, and a dick fillet doggie treat at the end but what about the titular pussy teeth? Well, we get to see A tooth but not ever in its home environment, which is the primary flaw of the film. The script and acting are decent, but I was looking for something a little more daring. I do like that the character realizes her unique potential in the final act, and I wish the film had a little more time to explore this path (though that would have certainly led things down a B path). Most Fucked up highlight (SPOILER): hungry dog + fresh piece of meat |
February 3, 2009 | N/A | |||
| Chronicles of an Exorcism - Unrated |
Saw this on Netflix instant watch, just after I watched similar film "The Exorcist Chronicles". This is decent for a found footage horror film, though the best scare (the cornfields one) becomes the worst scare when the cut uses it fives times instead of just once. I can't rate this film too highly because I hate found footage horror and I'm not into the exorcism subgenre. If you are into both of those horror subgenres, this may be a guilty pleasure gem for you. Our priests start out and stay pretty damn believable, but the possessed girl totally ruins the movie with poor acting, though she looks the part in medium shots, and the cameramen aren't performing to acting task either. I do like that the film references actual demons but I've no idea if the specifics are correct (I can recognize names and know some basic facts but I'm far from a demonologist). One big (maybe) error is that the possessed's local priest is Methodist and the consulted exorcists are obviously Catholic; I'm not sure this sort of cross-organizational cooperation occurs as I'd think the Catholic church wouldn't send representatives to care for a non-Catholic. Besides the possessed girl being acted weakly, the possessed afflictions are stereotypical in terms of film language (stigmata, flashing lights, warped voice, creepy contact lenses, urination, Tourette's style cursing, "tempting" a priest). I admit that the creepy contact lens is indeed creepy when at the end one character has one eye creepy and the other normal. But with both in, it quickly becomes too normal to scare with. This film is marginally better than incredibly similar film The Exorcist Chronicles. |
February 3, 2009 | N/A | |||
| Trainspotting - R | February 3, 2009 | N/A | ||||
| The Exorcist Chronicles - Unrated |
The structure of a mockumentary within a mockumentary is odd and makes things indecipherable, in the beginning primarily, but throughout the film, it suffers from confusing crosscutting. The score is atrociously overdone and does not sync with events onscreen for the most part. The acting is even worse, and sometimes makes the film unwatchable but certainly wholly unbelievable insofar as the characters' emotions. I don't mind the documentary method of filming and honestly most of the shots are better coordinated than handheld crap in large budget mainstream pieces. I do mind that the acting is so bad that it betrays an otherwise decent script structure. Sadly, there's no scares here and no one ever addresses why all possessed people are bed-ridden. When the "exorcisms" themselves are performed, it is little more than cheap rips from the classic bar-setter "The Exorcist". If exorcism is your thing like how zombies are my thing, then you may find something worthwhile here, but with this low level of acting, I seriously doubt it. |
January 31, 2009 | N/A | |||
| Running With Scissors - R | January 31, 2009 | N/A | ||||
| Hell House - Unrated |
I don't feel like this documentary reveals anything we didn't know was already there. People so ignorant of reality and into their own viewpoint so intensely that they think the Star of David is a pentagram, that Harry Potter and Magic the Gathering lead to Satanism, that AIDs can claim a victim in only a few days and that the disease exclusively targets gay men, that RU486 regularly kills people who take it and is as dangerous as late term abortions, that "date rape drug" or "mickey" is as technical of a name to give, that "speaking in tongues" is spiritual enlightenment and not a coverup for deep emotional trauma and possible mental illness. Just look at this country's voting records and one already knows how many and how deeply ignorant this section of the population really is. This film is good for a laugh and seeing how fundamentalists operate (by a hive mindset that brainwashes children and emotionally susceptible people). I do wish there had been more sequences depicting people who went through being openly outraged at those who put this show on; as it is, there is one sequence but I know that there were hundreds more of those confrontations. Also, some say that this is a non-judgmental film, and that's absolute shit; this film is clearly sympathetic to this ignorant and hateful lifestyle, allowing the people featured to engage in their contrary actions without questioning them (like the guy who acts at the Hell House and then does incredibly mock-violent underground wrestling matches). The film does clearly give these people ample opportunities to spout the doctrines they've been taught to repeat, and lets them do it proudly without any consequence of a followup question. |
January 31, 2009 | N/A | |||
| Limelight - G | Chaplin's career reflection piece, featuring Buster Keaton | January 28, 2009 | N/A | |||
| Frost/Nixon - R |
Frank Langella is a powerhouse actor, and should get the biggie Oscar nod for his stunner of a performance. The moment that Rockwell's character discusses - the look of defeat on Nixon - is one of the greatest and truest expressions I've seen from an actor. The tete-a-tete story is well framed within a polite guise. An interesting glimpse into the assemblage of this interview, both the funding and physical set arrangement. This film is less about politics and really about the fight to regain the limelight, as the characters themselves acknowledge. This film is also about the nature of media, of things on and off the record, of intellectual battles raged in the moment via oral discussion. And it's an inspirational piece for anyone who is contemplating taking a large risk which is absurdly lofty and surreal in order to gain success in their career. I also highly like how the film is framed by documentary-esque interviews and stamped with dates; that should make it easier for the history buff watcher to decipher fact from fiction and for everyone, it nicely sections and paces the film's sequences. |
January 27, 2009 | N/A | |||
| Sweet Hostage - Unrated | January 26, 2009 | N/A | ||||
| Seed - Unrated |
I feel that I must address the director before his film due to the incredible amount of shit he receives from the internet by people who haven't even seen his movies (or just House of the Dead). Yes, it's Uwe Boll time. Considering the amount of pure crap that emanates from the horror genre, Boll is making better than average flicks. For the horror genre, Boll nowhere near deserves the level of hatred and criticism he gets. All that aside, let me move on to this actual film. There's alot not to like about this film. I wish steadicam or a tripod/dolly were occasionally used. The only steady shot is the "hammer scene" (I think it's more a mallet or the back edge of a small hatchet though), but halfway through the scene, the victim becomes CGI and the camera does some instazoom shot when the killer's weapon strikes the victims head; this zoom technique is not used when it is clearly the actor and too opaquely reveals even to an ignorant audience member that we have shifted from practical to digital effects. The scene starts out great, and ends great, but the middle is compromised due to poor CG. I cannot exactly tell in which time period the film is set as some of the set components appear as possible anachronisms. The plot is filled with holes, the first one being: I understand Boll is trying to echo the cliche use of 6's by sending only six cops to take down the killer, but in no time period is that a reasonable amount of force to send to apprehend someone who has murdered 666 people; it's unrealistic and a cheap reason to give the main protagonist stake in the killer's fate. I also don't think ANY institution executes and then buries immediately past the 1960s; the body would have been cremated by the state on an offsite area and not buried on the penitentiary property. The score is atrociously melodramatic and ineffective. There is still much to like here. This is the horror genre, so I can forgive some small leaps of continuity and logic as I just described as long as the extreme content can stand on its own. This stuff can. The movie begins with the killer watching real footage of people killing dogs (and it will sicken any sane human). You could accuse the director of using this as a cheap grossout trick, but I like to think of it this way: by showing real violence that disturbs, the director challenges himself to show you simulated violence that will disturb as much. In the final scene of the film, this is achieved and it bookends the movie well, elevating it a bit above its faults. It is a generally accepted rule of screenwriting that no matter how terrible your antagonist, you do not kill a child or family pet in a film; this film breaks both of those rules in the first five minutes. It does what every screenwriting guru says it will - makes the killer wholly unempathetic and will eliminate half of the audience due to immediate walkout (r in this case immediately stopping the DVD and tossing it back in the rental case). I've yet to encounter very many segments which can cause me to stop watching a film, so nothing stops me, especially not here. The killer's obsession with filming time-lapse decomposition is interesting and very cinematic but underutilized in terms of possible thematic resonance. It does serve to make for a fantastically bleak ending though. I'd encourage horror viewers to get over your preconceived notions of Uwe Boll and give this flick a try, as it has some great moments and it certainly not as shit as most low budget (or wide release) serial killer movies hurled at genre viewers. Fuck, it's hella better than Hostel and the bulk of the Saw series. "Most fucked up" highlight: the first scene and the final scene |
January 26, 2009 | N/A | |||
| Vacancy 2: The First Cut - R |
I kind of can't believe I watched the whole thing, but that's a testament to the editor I suppose. Even though the script, acting, score, shots, and kills are terrible the piece is well paced and watchable. So much less thrilling than the first, and reused plenty of tricks. I didn't believe that's how this idea got started (with the captured killer proposing it to the motel attendants) and the ending doesn't tie to the first movie (this is a prequel). This is meant to depict the first "Vacancy" victims, and the first mistake is to pick a younger and less interesting bunch. These victim characters are flat, and all the attempts at fleshing out the killers fail as well. I would have rathered the honeymoon couple in the opening segment be used as the first victims; as it could be used to contrast the victims of the first movie (married for some time and considering divorce). I would have rathered an story with echoing character components than a clumsy directionless story with echoing scare devices. |
January 26, 2009 | N/A | |||
| Vacancy - R |
This was an uber effective and fun treatment with a special twist on the "went down the wrong road and got stuck with serial killers" movie. In this one, the backwards serial killers make marketed snuff from all their victims, and this film's two protagonist victims discover this fact while waiting for their death on the same "set". The tension built up great and stayed strong. I like that the layout of the set is easily communicated that I can visualize and make real the dimensions of the setting. The simplicity of the scares (the masks, the banging on the door, being watched by the killers) is effective. I like the physique of these killers, how they are so quick and flexible. The voyeur aspect of this film adds great dimension to it. I think the best thing about it is that the protagonists act (for the most part) pretty damn rationally; they do what we as the removed viewer can suggest they do and stay within the script (see Devil's Chair or Scream 2 for films that jump out of the script to guide the characters through horror). All of the acting is solid, and that's often a back-breaker for a survival horror. Just a solid flick. "Most fucked up" highlight: seeing the first snuff scenes on the room's TV set and watching the characters realize that they're in that room |
January 26, 2009 | N/A | |||
| Thesis (Tesis) - R | plot centered around snuff | January 26, 2009 | N/A | |||
| Return of the Fly - Unrated | Originally made for television, cheesier and less resounding than its predecessor. Still a great B movie for a Friday night. | January 26, 2009 | N/A | |||
| Pineapple Express - R |
The movie is a successful and very funny stoner buddy comedy, at least until the big shootout at the end. The shootout sequence is obviously trying to satirize Hollywood violence with its own Hollywood violence, but it isn't funny; however the scene following it (last scene of the film) which returns to the stoner buddy comedy format does the job of making that sequence funny. Cut that sequence down and put in more stoner buddy moments, and this would have been a 4 star. Still, the best production I've seen from Apatow yet. One more complaint: where in the FUCK can you get a quarter of premo shit for only $75?!?!? Like the featured gun violence, wholly unrealistic and NOT FUNNY. |
January 26, 2009 | N/A | |||
| War, Inc. - R | This is our generation's Dr. Strangelove, and like Dr. Strangelove, it isn't as funny now as it could possibly be in a few decades due to the fact that it is too close to painful reality. A must see for all citizens of the world. | January 26, 2009 | N/A | |||
| Withnail and I - R | Brilliant dialogue. | January 26, 2009 | N/A | |||
| Ghost Town - PG-13 | Gervais does great in the lead role in this light romantic comedy version of "Ghost Whisperer". It works for what it is, but I don't like light comedy, and I didn't really laugh at this too vanilla movie. Gervais constructs an interesting character (wonder if he referenced Karl for any of the "annoyt with everthang" behaviors of this character). Good to watch if you like watching a typical Gervais character, but beware that this definitely isn't deeply insightful and ground-breaking comedy like The Office or Extras. | January 23, 2009 | N/A | |||
| Voices of a Distant Star - Unrated |
Most prior reviews have said what needs to be said: this is a brilliant short animated film, with a plot and theme that are at once sincere and beautiful simple human emotion yet also high concept and metaphysically reflective. The most striking thing about this project's creation is that is entirely auteured. It begs the question that if one man with a bit of his wife's help can achieve this splendor, then why do teams of fifty plus struggle to crank out the slightly better than mediocre? |
January 22, 2009 | N/A |
1678 ratings
588 reviews
