| Movie | Rating | Review | Date | Your Rating | Match | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Blade Runner - R |
Blade Runner is an extraordinary science fiction film that not only packs in good action and special effects, but a good plot and storyline. Harrison Ford, who by this time was best known for Han Solo and Indiana Jones, is now a police officer named Rick Deckard, also known as the Blade Runner. We are also introduced to characters like Holden, Leon, Roy Batty, and Sean Young as Rachael. Based upon the novel "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep" by Phillip K. Dick, this film is jam packed with hours of high quality effects and many glorious stunts that will make you ask yourself. How did they do that? Blade Runner is an excellent film, and if you are bored on a Saturday night, I say watch this film, it is very entertaining and a lot of fun. |
December 20, 2009 | N/A | |||
| Just Friends - PG-13 | This film really delivers. It sets you up thinking - seen this all before admittedly in reverse where the ugly girl grows up to be a beautiful swan not the guy - but I have to say Ryan Reynolds does a great job with a fantastic supporting cast (him and his brother are hilarious) and I would recommend a watch.The set up initially caused me some concern thinking it was just another 'lets laugh at the fat kid' movie but actually I found it was not about him being over weight or geeky, but just about how we are when we are teenagers.The scene where he is singing into a mirror - genius. And let's face it, we have all been there.... It's not the greatest movie ever made, not even the greatest RomCom ever made but it was really enjoyable and a good laugh. A pleasant surprise. | December 20, 2009 | N/A | |||
| Sodom and Gomorrah - PG |
Sodom and Gomorrah was a big flop when it was released and has been nearly forgotten since then. This is a shame. It's certainly no classic like Ben Hur or Spartacus,and it has the obvious flaws many films like this share-corny dialogue,woman's make-up and hair which betrays the decade the film was made in,to name but two-but if you like this kind of film it's very entertaining and worth a watch. At times you could swear De Mille directed it,but it was actually directed by Robert Aldrich,a real curio in his career. The first hour does dawdle along a little,but the middle of the film contains a very lengthy battle sequence which is extremely impressive. In these days of CGI,it's great to see hundreds of REAL people fighting on the screen,and it's great the way the battle is in stages and shows various tactics by the two sides instead of just being a chaotic mess. The climatic destruction {well,it's based on a well known Bible story, so I don't think this is a spoiler!} of the twin cities of Sodom and Gomorrah {although we only seem to see Sodom} is still quite a well achieved spectacle,in fact technically the film still generally holds up,except for a few very unconvincing shots when an army is engulfed in water. Those who find some of the film a little heavy can enjoy the odd touch of vivid sadism {people on a wheel lowered into fire,a prisoner threatened by a blind man whose armour produces spikes when he breaths} and plenty of references to the 'sins' of the Sodomites-nothing is explicit,but things such as incest,sexual servitude and lesbianism are certainly hinted at. Yet the Hebrews,by comparison,are such a dull humourless lot,one might occasionally sympathise with the Sodomites,and this was maybe intended. As with most of Aldrich's films,it's actually quite cynical,and doesn't take easy sides. Stuart Granger is fine as Lot but it's the underrated Stanley Baker,as the scheming Astorath who chases anything in a skirt, who gives the stand-out performance,memorably corrupt. One should also mention Miklos Rozsa's superb score which ranks along side his other classic scores for related films like Ben Hur and El Cid. He superbly evokes the period and setting whilst providing a gorgeous love theme and a number of other great themes. Of course it's very melodramatic,but it suits the film! Sodom and Gomorrah exists in several heavily cut down versions which may quicken the pace but are extremely choppy,often cutting into scenes when they are obviously half way through. The full 155-odd minute version is sometimes shown,and is available in some countries on DVD,but really demands a proper,remastered,etc. release. It's really worth seeing,as long as you like this kind of stuff of course! |
December 20, 2009 | N/A | |||
| Total Recall - R |
I've seen TOTAL RECALL many times over the years and I'm never failed to be impressed with it . Some people dislike it and I feel I must defend the movie " Confused plot " - Sorry but I managed to understand the complex plot first time I saw the movie and was impressed that Hollywood had merged a high concept plot with a FX laden extravaganza , such a pity this didn't lead to more thoughtful action adventures . If you want to see a confused plot try watching a James Bond movie from the 1980s " The violence " - Yeah this is a violent movie for sure but I do wish people would educate themselves to the work of directors before they criticize . Paul Verhoeven had previously made FLESH AND BLOOD and ROBOCOP so a futuristic adventure by Verhoeven that was awarded an 18 certificate isn't going to be confused with an episode of the teletubbies What I liked from Verhoeven's directing is that he's made everything so recognizable , nothing is ridiculously futuristic looking and we see the characters wearing clothes that wouldn't look out of place in the 1980s . Verhoeven also brings little satirical stabs to the proceedings as he did with ROBOCOP and it's a great shame we see less and less of this European director working for Hollywood Verhoeven even gets a good performance from Big Arnie , okay this body builder was never in danger of winning an Oscar but Arnie doesn't send himself up and nor do his wise cracks like in his other blockbusters but he does make for an affable - Though violent - hero . Michael Ironside gives the most memorable performance which considering he spends most of the movie running around with a gun is no small achievement . One interesting thing I noticed about TOTAL RECALL after seeing it again last night is that it's unapologetic on being on the side of the rebels who are waging a war against the greedy Mars company . Anyone believe that if it was made today the rebels/terrorists would be the bad guys? Anyway this is along with the original TERMINATOR the best movie starring Arnie though most of the credit for this movie belongs to the screenwriters and director and it's a great pity Hollywood is reluctant to mix a high concept SF plot with a crowd pleasing action adventure. |
December 19, 2009 | N/A | |||
| Kama Sutra: A Tale of Love - R |
Its probably hard to take a subject like the Kama Sutra and distill it into a good movie that's not rated X. That being said, this movie does a good job at creating a plot around a tale of forbidden love that is set in an India of ages past. The staging and art direction are all well done-- and one certainly gets a sense of the opulence of India, simply through the luxuriant costume design that pops up in every scene. Where the movie has problems is that the protagonists are attractive, but not compelling as actors. We feel pity for their plight as part of a caste, but the villains are so equally cardboard that its hard to feel much empathy for anyone in this movie. The other curious aspect of this movie is the ending-- which isn't happy... and seems more a statement on the caste system itself. The feminism of the main character in the final scenes seems quite absurd, but perhaps that is just the nature of this difficult to adapt material. |
December 19, 2009 | N/A | |||
| Crazy Heart - R | December 19, 2009 | N/A | ||||
| A Bronx Tale - R |
De Niro's bright directorial debut is a gangster movie with a difference - one with warmth and sensitivity. The vibrant voice-over narration and development of its young protagonist Calogero (a character based on Palminteri) provide it, against a traditionally colourful look at Italian American neighbourhood archetypes. Taking place in 'The Bronx' of the 1960s, Palminteri's screenplay achieves the commendable feat of detailing a glamorous, sometimes humorous look at familiar gangster territory, without straining from the intimate coming of age story at its heart. Among the many themes examined include the importance of friendship, loyalty towards family, and moral lessons of never wasting your talent and respecting others for who they are. Familiar stuff, but examined with a different kind of richness here. First seen aged 9 (Francis Capra), the Yankee supporting 'C' takes us through a daily stroll of life in his neighbourhood and his early seduction by the lifestyle of his idol Sonny. To C, Sonny is a paragon of gangster glamour, with his fearful or loving (we're never sure) associates, sky blue Cadillac and the cool use of just three figures to make a point. With Calogero appearing in virtually every scene, the depth he gives to his story is one to rival Henry Hill's in Goodfellas, though the two tales could hardly be any different. Calogero's focus is not on gaining power and joining the ranks of Mafiosos, but of growing up to learn some basic life lessons. His moral growth is assisted by two contrasting father figures: his honest-working father, who is proud of driving a bus all day so his family is able to eat steak once a week, and the ready-made wealth of Sonny. Initially, Calogero acts merely as a bystander, watching on outside his house whenever Sonny is around, imitating his every action as a way of gaining his attention. Nothing happens, Calogero tells us, until one day. Sonny takes the kid under his wing, offering him a job throwing dice in crap games, for which he wins Sonny's crowd big money, and earns a share of it himself. Sonny understands the boy, respects him like an adult and talks to him without condescending. The excellent screenplay by Chazz Palminteri provides the easiest possible platform for De Niro, who doesn't need to direct with the innovative intensity of his mentor Martin Scorsese, for the events detailed are simple enough to come vividly to life. He only a similar rock n roll soundtrack, with the songs chosen shrewdly to comment on the action. His performance as Lorenzo is also a mature one, only once recalling his wise-guy roles of past, when he postures to his son over the concept of money. Palminteri as Sonny manages to humanise an erratic, charismatic character that, in different hands, would not have worked. His story is clearly a labour of love, nostalgic without touching sentimentality, with infectious dialogue, fine set pieces, moral lessons and characters being served realistically by the story. Passionate, warm, classical storytelling. What C calls "just another Bronx Tale" is a very special experience. |
December 19, 2009 | N/A | |||
| Where the Wild Things Are - PG |
Where The Wild Things Are Expected: 11 December It?s been a loooong time coming, but Spike Jonze seems to think he?s finally cracked his adaptation of Maurice Sendak?s beloved kid book. A boy named Max enters a world of monsters who end up crowning him their king. It?s probably not for the very little ones, but this darker fantasy should be just the thing for cold winter nights. Honestly the best film that I have seen of this year, without hesitation. At first i was weary of seeing this film, I didn't like the idea that it was made from a children's book and that the monsters looked a bit too much like puppets, looking back I now fully realise that you should NEVER judge a book by it's cover. It was honestly an amazing, moving & powerful film. I have never cried at a film since "My sisters keeper" a while ago, I thought this would be the last film that would make me cry. I can honestly not say how much I adored this film, I could really relate to it as well from when I was younger, at the beginning I felt like I was Max, and felt more like him throughout the whole film. If you are considering seeing this movie GO AND SEE IT! You are guaranteed not to be disappointed. Look out for: Catherine Keener as Max?s stressed mom |
December 19, 2009 | N/A | |||
| Did You Hear About the Morgans? - PG-13 |
I wish never hear about the Morgans, but I did. I attended the London movie premiere for this on Tuesday and there is always one BIG PROBLEM about premieres... if the movie is bad you can't leave. I realised very early on in this movie that I had a BIG PROBLEM. Getting through this movie and hearing other people chuckle politely at the jokes just so as not to offend SJP and HG made the atmosphere unbearable. The storyline was terrible, the dialogue was predictable and the characters were as if plucked straight from other movies: HG was Charles from 'Four Weddings', Sam Elliot was Virgil from 'Tombstone', Mary Steenburgen was Clara from 'Back to the Future 3' and SJP was Paula from 'Failure to Launch'... and you spend the entire movie thinking about how much better all of those other movies were! When this ended, I thought to myself "Why has this been made at all?" and then it dawned upon me... MARKETING PLOY. SJP has SATC 2 coming out next year and needs to get back into the public eye just before that and HG needs to help his Ex (Liz) raise awareness for her charity. This movie will get them some column inches in magazine and some exposure on the Internet. It makes perfect sense now... PRO: I smiled at the last joke in the movie. CON: I only smiled at the last joke in the movie |
December 18, 2009 | N/A | |||
| Avatar - PG-13 |
I saw this epic last night at the Empire Leicester Sq in London, which is a superb venue in which to view this film. Huge screen, excellent sound and an extraordinary Dolby, 3 dimensional image. The whole effect is mind blowing. This is a 'Must see' movie, innovative, and extraordinary. I think it will be regarded by most cinema goers as another milestone in the history of the art. The level of realism achieved is remarkable, and although the film is relatively long in real time, it retains it's excitement and holds the audience's attention to the end. Performances are good, but this is not the sort of film that dwells on big star value for the actors, although Sigorney Weaver does shine and delivers a very convincing performance, as do the rest of the cast. But as there is so much entertainment and action value on screen the human element does not dominate in the usual way. As Writer/Director, James Cameron deserves high praise for this creation and in my opinion it will break box office records. I thoroughly enjoyed this film. |
December 18, 2009 | N/A | |||
| Il fiore delle mille e una notte (Flower of the Arabian Nights) (Arabian Nights) - Unrated | Truth is not in only one dream but in many dreams. At once treachery in this sun-crashed world. Treachery of a slave who chooses her master. Treachery of a Christian who steals the slave for some Moslem buyer who had been refused by her. Treachery of the desert that forces these people to move around to find water for men and cattle alike. Treachery of love itself that is always at first sight, has little to do with discriminating between boys and girls, women and men. Strangely enough for a long time we believe love is nothing but desire and lust leading to suffering and deception, disappointment. And yet we are to find there is a lot more beyond that simple carnal, though also spiritual, appeal, attraction. There is attachment, an attachment that has to do with fate, a curse, a malediction, happiness. Happiness beyond fate, the curse, the malediction of treachery, vengeance, cruelty. On the track of Zumurud, the stolen slave. And Nordine, her chosen master, is the light of the Lord, the light of that happiness. There is a Song of Song atmosphere here when Nordine does not look after his own vineyard and his Zumurud is stolen again, kidnapped by some other man, a Kurd mind you, after the Christian, and his forty acolytes. The Christian ends up on a cross. The Kurd ends up on a cross. And we are delving into the side-tracks of this main story. There is nothing one can do against the will of God. Then more dramatic stories are going to be told, twisted into and around one another with dramas and more dramas all ordered and commanded by fate no one can evade. The story of the tragic love of Aziz and Aziza destroyed or made impossible by Budur who will end up causing Aziza's death and will castrate Aziz. The story of Aziz and Tadji and the decoration of a pavilion in Queen Dunya's garden, the queen who hates men, and the love that will come out of it. The Stories of the two workers, Shahzaman and Yunan, two dramatic stories of fate that enslaves and victimizes human beings, and their choice to drop everything, sons of Kings that they are, and become mendicants to serve God. A vision of God who is totally absent. Fate is not the decision of God but seems to be some kind of force of its own and the only way to compensate for that necessarily negative fate is to dedicate one's life to God. God is abstract. God has no church, no clergy. God only has these mendicants who suffer for his glory, for his rule. Man is taken between the pagan acceptance of fate and the Godlike attitude that leads to becoming a permanent pilgrim on earth. This power of God is captured in civilizations we understand to be Moslem or Hindu, often at the crossing point between old millennium-long beliefs that edge on superstitions and an abstract notion of God that requires absolute submission. The end of the film hence is completely different because it deals with the second, happy and final meeting between Nordine and Zumulud, between the master and the slave turned king in a love that starts with obedience and ends with passion. In this film Pasolini does not follow a painter, nor a story teller, but a poet, the Arabian poet who speaks of love and the success of love beyond all kinds of difficulties, traps, snares, a love that he embodies in a man and a woman, but that is constantly shown as being ambiguous, limitless, without any boundaries. His vision of the mixing of these two cultures, Semitic Islam and Indo-Aryan Hinduism (note it cannot be Buddhism because of the belief in God) is exhilaratingly fascinating. These Arabian Nights are definitely reflecting that meeting point but here Pasolini makes it a metaphor and a parable of the future of humanity that can only find love, life, a reality in the joining of the various traditions of spirituality that humanity has produced in its divine desire to understand and explain what was a perfect mystery for it, viz. life itself that can only be measured and appreciated when death comes. | December 18, 2009 | N/A | |||
| I Racconti di Canterbury (The Canterbury Tales) - Unrated |
This movie is second of Pasolini's so called 'Trilogy of Love' (Il Decameron, I Racconti di Canterbury, Il fiore di mille e una notte; 1970-1974). All these movies are quite specific, there are said not to be that provocative or intriguing. They are greatly influenced by the fact that while directing them Pasolini was contented because of his intimate relationship with the 'innocent barbarian', actor Ninetto Davoli. It is also said that in 'Trilogy of Love' Pasolini became resigned to the present time world by escaping to the past. However I don't think it's true. In these movies, Pasolini introduces to the audience an incorrupt world where people don't care about 'material aspects of life', they try to live at the full stretch, they seek love and, of course, sex and they do not respect 'the repressive limits imposed by religious and bourgeois morality' (Gino Moliterno). This is probably why Pasolini later declared that these three films were most ideological of his career (in his famous and long interview with Massimo Fini). I suppose Pasolini tried to confront such 'primitive' world with the world he had lived in and which he had hated so much (this confrontation is present all the time, especially by the contrast between the love and the death, by the contrast between the first tales, in which the human naked body dominates, and the last two tales in which pursuit of money causes death and perdition. Because of such end it is also suggested that I Racconti di Canterbury are very close to Pasolini's disillusioned last movie, Saló). It is common to hear that Chaucer must have rolled over in his grave after this movie was released. But if you try to understand The Canterbury Tales in the context of Chaucer's attitude towards love in his (other) literary works, you will probably find that Chaucer would resemble to Pasolini alias Mr Chaucer ends the film with writing 'Here end the Canterbury Tales, told for the mere pleasure of their telling, Amen'. |
December 18, 2009 | N/A | |||
| Medea - Unrated | Medea is an extraordinary film which some will find difficult. Telling the story of Jason and his quest for the Golden Fleece, this is not the stuff of Ray Harryhausen. Meeting the priestess of the Fleece, Medea, he falls in love with her and takes her home. Years later, after bearing him sons, she exacts a terrible revenge after he spurns her for a new love. Medea is also extraordinary in exhibiting Pasolini's demonstration of contrasts in plot development and framing. In the sequence in which we are introduced to Medea, we witness the mesmeric nature of a human sacrifice, which changes from the ecstatic to the horrific within the same sequence. This motif recurs throughout the film, and has prompted admiration from French philosopher Gilles Deleuze, who mentions Pasolini in his treatise on the movement-image. Filmed with a mixture of professional and non-professional actors, Medea is a challenging and refreshing change from the usual, as it builds up to a frightening climax in an unconventional way. Often shown in 'World Cinema' slots late at night, it's a film worth staying up for, or recording, for those seeking an alternative to Hollywood pap. | December 18, 2009 | N/A | |||
| Il Decameron (The Decameron) - Unrated | he unapologetic choice of ancient, crumbling and dirty locations, coupled with the choice of "real-looking" actors devoid of manufactured graces made this film feel right. 14th century Italy surely was as full of natural humour, even in close proximity to death, as this film makes out. Casual sex in spite of the threat of mortal sin is treated likewise with candour. A real masterpiece showing humanity in all its various forms. | December 18, 2009 | N/A | |||
| The Cure - Unrated |
It's a means to an end... Kristine Watts is broken apart, missing her lover; she is not able to overcome her love for him which is lost in the past. She hires a stranger and gives a list of her mistakes with things for him to fix. But time is irreversible and sometimes the cure for the pain is a tragic end. The Cure is a wicked little film...very thrilling and real. A nice little neo noir story that I felt was not a waist of a few minutes of my time. Highly recommend. |
December 18, 2009 | N/A | |||
| As Good As It Gets - PG-13 |
Melvin is a romantic novelist who is a selfish manic compulsive who is rude and insulting to all he meets. When Melvin's gay neighbour is beaten up and robbed, Melvin agrees to look after his dog. The dog gives Melvin something to care about other than himself and his life is approaching normal until his regular waitress has to leave work to look after her asthmatic son and his neighbour wants his dog back. Melvin starts to realise that his life needs others for more than just selfish reasons. The big Oscar winner for Jack is recent years is enjoyable if you come to it knowing what to expect. The film is very sentimental but in a good way. The film is gently comic and amusing and the characters (although exaggerated) are winning and involving. The telling is a little long winded at times and the film could have been shorter but it is still enjoyable. It does tip over into sickly sentimentality at times and can be a bit syrupy but it comes with the territory. Nicholson is excellent and is the main reason it all works well. His un-PC Melvin is funny but also a character that you can hate and pity on several occasions. Kinnear is good because he is a solid understated character and not hammy or OTT like he can be. Hunt is good but is left with the majority of the syrup and sentiment where the other characters get more share of the laughs. Gooding Jr continues his trend of being good in over the top roles and is funny and happily avoids becoming a flaming gay stereotype. Overall this is a sentimental romantic comedy that is typical for the genre. The story wanders to it's point but the good cast, led by a great Nicholson, hold the whole thing together. A superior piece of sentimentality. |
December 16, 2009 | N/A | |||
| The Exorcist - R | The Exorcist is the best horror film ever made and there is one reason for this,the subject matter is treated with dignity and respect,too many "horror films" are made today that just don't try,it's as if they give up half way through and fall into self parody and amusement.the Exorcist is an exception and one of the very few good horror films around.the film works on a number of levels and is one of the few films I know of to do this i.e subliminal imagery,multiple storylines. a lot has been written about this film drawing mainly on sensationalism surrounding the films release that it would be hard for someone who has not seen the film to not have any preconceptions,but if you have not seen the film do try to keep an open mind because it will scare the hell out of you.this is also one of the rare cases where a film could arguably be better than the book it was adapted from.in my opinion the film could not have been made any better,the cast throughout are superb, the locations and production are second to none,all the characters are totally believable and there are points in the film where you think all this could really happen and it is for that reason the film is frightening and continues to frighten people to this day....a true shocker and one that has not lost any of its impact over the years. | December 14, 2009 | N/A | |||
| Exorcist II - The Heretic - R | Boorman is a real unique talent, who constantly shows us the world from an unusual perspective. This is one of his most annoyingly idiosyncratic films when seen for the first time. Yet it's so alive and full of ideas, that it remains stimulating when the original film is reduced in memory to a few gory set pieces. Some of the images are as great as any in film history and the music score is terrific. It has lots of things wrong with it, but on the whole, it is a candidate for the most underrated film ever made. | December 14, 2009 | N/A | |||
| The Exorcist III - R | William Peter Blatty can really write. Prose and dialogue. No argument. But can he direct a movie? On the strength of 'Exorcist III,' yes he can. This isn't to say that the film doesn't have its problems. On the contrary, its biggest problem, the out-of-character 'crowd-pleasing' SFX climax stops it from being one of the greats. So why do I have a soft spot for this film? If, like me, you appreciate horror films that are both scary and made for grown-ups, 'Exorcist III' is refreshing and memorable for its intelligent, non-ironic journey into darkness and for its refusal (bar that ending) to dumb down for the kids. If 'Scream' is your idea of a great horror movie, this isn't one for you! The cast is not nearly young and attractive enough, there are nowhere near enough gags (though Blatty's dry, sardonic wit is happily in evidence) and the film has no pretensions at being an autopsy of the genre, therefore somehow lifting it above the films it purports to comment on. 'Exorcist III' is literary beyond 'Scream's' self-referential trivia-chasing (I would love to hear Detective Kinderman critiquing that movie!) Read 'Legion' and you'll have an idea of how good the film should have been. Flaws acknowledged and accepted, don't miss out on Brad Dourif's best performance since 'Cuckoo's Nest,' scene-stealing turns by Ed Flanders and Nancy Fish, or the superlative production design, photography and sound. More than anything else, it's the atmosphere of the film that stays with me. I can recall very few films that have a better sense of the power of stillness and silence. So much of the violence is communicated only in dialogue; your mind reluctantly does the rest | December 14, 2009 | N/A | |||
| Dominion - Prequel to the Exorcist - R |
Dominion is a genuinely interesting and ambitious film that doesn't quite make it despite being superior to Harlin's enjoyably unambitious schlocky remake. More a drama about faith than a horror film, it's not even remotely chilling and in the hands of the director of the awful Cat People remake it's attempts to throw in a few shocks (or "trying to make the cow look like a horse" as he puts it on his heavily vetted audio commentary) simply don't work any more than the crude dream imagery straight out of a 40s noir ? he's just not interested in that sort of thing. He's much better at more human acts of violence: the suicide scene is a vast improvement on the terrible version in Harlin's film without the unnecessary supernatural trappings, while a pair of apparently arbitrary murders are all the more jolting for their human origin and the rationale behind them. For all its failings, the film is far from unsalvageable, and the decision to junk it and completely reshoot it with a new script, director and, in many cases, supporting cast seems a major over-reaction. It's also surprising just how little crossover there is between the two films ? not just the respective scripts and the themes, but how little footage was pressed into service on the remake (barely two minutes, most of it establishing shots and a brief deleted scene). It's also clear that the film is still uncompleted. The cgi is terrible and all too obviously unfinished and the score suffers from being performed on synths rather than by an orchestra, which gives it a demo/temp track effect that doesn't always help the film, but the biggest problem remains the direction. While co-writer Caleb Carr's complaints about Schrader having no visual sense are frankly bizarre ? it's by far his best looking movie and certainly his most cinematic ? he's unable to rack up much tension, particularly in the finale. Much of this seems to be due to his inability to inspire his cast: with much of the film played in long takes, many of the supporting players aren't up to the script and clearly aren't getting enough help (the wildly inadequate Clara Bellar suffering more than most in the role taken by Isabella Scorupco in the remake). While there isn't a performance as bad as Alan Ford's in the Harlin version, and a couple ? particularly Julian Wadham and a superb Ralph Brown ? are actually considerably better than the remake, the moral escalation of the very well-written prologue loses much of its power due to a flat performance from Antonie Kamerling's German officer. In Schrader's hands, it doesn't matter because we don't care because the performances don't convince us that it's real. Curiously, the sequence is much better handled in the Harlin version, where it's both better staged and more effectively utilised as a recurring flashback. On the plus side, he has a much better sense of time and place than Harlin. Whereas the remake looked like a glossy modern studio picture, this does have an old National Geographic visual quality that makes it look like it was actually shot in post-war Africa. The British troops, so cartoonish second time round, are much more convincingly of their time here, adding a surprising note of authenticity. The script is fairly intelligent and ambitious on the big themes but does drop the ball on the clumsily sketched relationship between Merrin and Rachel, with the audience having to take too much on faith with no real grounds: at times it feels like the actors are still waiting for another emotional scene to be written but are completely in the dark about its content. Similarly, it doesn't always deal with the issues it raises and, as with all the Exorcist follow-ups, it falls badly in the "we need an exorcism" finale. For once the film really does need to end with an exorcism, but when it strays outside the temple the shoddy cgi Northern Lights and Bellar's looney face just render the footage laughable. However, the substance of the Satanic threat is more interesting than conjuring tricks here, emphasising the great deceiver's nature as the father of lies, tempting not by offering future riches but by erasing the mistakes of the past that cause such torment. The catalyst is once again a possessed youth, in this case a crippled albino outcast who finds himself being cured by the demon. Naturally, the young missionary immediately mistakes it for a miracle and the boy as proof of God's love, before painfully learning the error of his ways, leaving Stellan Skarsgard's disillusioned Father Merrin to exorcise the boy and confront his own more personal demons. Schrader makes less of the battleground ? an elaborate ancient church deliberately buried in Africa hundreds of years ago ? without ever making it enough of an intimate story to compensate. But when it works, it works well, and it constantly holds your interest. Not quite a failure, not quite a success but certainly worth digging up. Even if you feel like giving up on it, make sure you watch the ending, where Schrader takes his obsession with The Searchers to new heights, lifting its final shot for a wonderfully outrageous homage as Skarsgard walks out of the door in a perfect imitation of Wayne's body motion to wander forever between the winds? |
December 14, 2009 | N/A | |||
| Exorcist - The Beginning - R | Renny Harlin directs the second prequel to the brilliant "The Exorcist", after Paul Schrader's initial attempt was deemed not scary (or gory) enough by producers. Concerning the abandonment of his faith before the events of "The Exorcist", "Exorcist: The Beginning" is at most largely different in tone to its chronological follow up. At a glance, the film would seem more suited to the "Omen" saga, with the director using legitimate biblical events to establish Lancaster Merrin's relationship with the demon Pazuzu. The weaker points of the movie include the casting of Alan Ford as Jeffries. His character seems unusually vacant from the plot and insignificant to the story whilst Ford makes no attempt of playing Jeffries as anything other than Brick Top from "Snatch", a performance that stands out uncomfortably in a bleak horror film set in the late forties. Meanwhile, whilst Stellan Skarsgard's performance as Lancaster Merrin is convincing and well acted, he is not playing the same Merrin as Max Von Sydow, an advantage to Skarsgard's ability, but it weakens the sense of continuity within the character. It does not feel like the viewer is watching the same person, whereas, in a similar case, Ewan McGregor's portrayal of Obi Wan Kenobi in the "Star Wars" prequels compliments Alec Guiness' in the earlier films. These weaknesses are very much outweighed by the positive elements in the film. Whilst the tone is different, the shock value is still there and there are many shocking "Exorcist" elements that reinforce the fact that this is the same evil the viewer endured in the 1973 film. Much like "The Exorcist," "Exorcist: The beginning" introduces the viewer to a wealth of uneasy psychological tension (aswell as the most shocking child - related accident ever put on film) before unleashing unrestrained shock and vulgarity, at some points even more unsettling than the original film.... lets just say Reagan was strapped safely to a bed. Although there are numerous flaws that prevent this from holding the torch to the original, "Exorcist: The beginning" is a worthy foundation for the demonic saga and casts a triumphant shadow over previous sequels and the climactic encounter is a nostalgic treat, whilst Merrin's rediscovery of his faith can not fail to raise a smile in an otherwise bleak situation. | December 14, 2009 | N/A | |||
| The Amityville Horror - R | Excited about the remake I decided to go out and just but the original Amityville Horror. Being a huge horror buff, I just had to and besides I had only seen some of it's absurd sequels. hearing mixed reviews from friends and critics from terrifying to hilarious I turned it on with my boyfriend at the time and prepared myself for something scary. I must say that I was quite impressed. And although slightly disappointed in some of the films scenes ultimately I must say this is one old fashioned scary flick! I can hugely recognize the appeal it had in it's it's hey day. With the exception of Texas chainsaw Massacre, Evil Dead, the Omen and some others I rarely see what people did in their horror classics nowadays. Like The Exorcist, pretty damn boring and funny in my opinion. But getting back to this film. It builds a creeping mood filled with fright inducing suspense. The effects are simple but effective and the performances are somewhat over the top but necessarily wacky. The film's overall lasting appeal has little to do with the film's apparent campiness. it has more to do with the real terror inducing legend that inspired it. Like the Chainsaw remake the new ones looks to amp up the horror and intensity which would be greatly welcomed. Although a great horror classic Amityville's finale is somewhat anti climactic and after a long and impressively scary build-up it fails to deliver the end goods. But whoa some of the scenes from the imaginary friend Jody flying out the window, to the visitor at the door, to the voice in the house and just everything in the basement this film is all about delivering some authentic chills. | December 14, 2009 | N/A | |||
| Amityville II: The Possession - R |
Amityville II: The Possession, which claims to be a prequel to the original Amityville Horror (1979), once again takes us to the infamous haunted Long Island house. The film opens with a shot of the house with a 'for sale' sign in the foreground as the camera pans around the outside while the credits play. Amityville II: The Possession then cuts to another shot of the house, this time the sign says 'sold'. An Italian American family have brought the house & are moving in, husband & wife Anthony (Burt Young) & Dolores Montelli (Rutanya Alda) with their four children, Sonny (Jack Magner), Patricia (Diane Franklin), Jan (Erika Katz) & Mark (Brent Katz). At first glance the large house seems perfect & is beautiful, but almost immediately things start to go wrong for the family. Dolores senses a presence in the basement which she claims touched her, when they sit down for their first meal that night & try to say a prayer the mirror on the wall suddenly falls off & begins to crack. Also that night the family are disturbed by banging on their front door & obscene images are mysteriously painted on walls. Sonny starts to hear strange demonic voices on his Walkman as well. The incidents don't stop & as a result the family starts to fall apart. However Dolores still senses an evil presence & contacts their local priest, Father Frank Adamsky (James Olson) & asks him to bless their house. Meanwhile Sonny is becoming more & more withdrawn as the evil presence in the house specifically singles him out & starts to possess him, the voices on his Walkman convince Sonny to seduce & have sex with his younger sister Patricia & eventually tries to get Sonny to kill his entire family. After witnessing some of these events & doing some research Father Adamsky starts to realise what's going on & is convinced that Sonny is being possessed by evil spirits, but is it too late to save Sonny & the Montelli family? Directed by Damiano Damiani I thought Amityville II: The Possession was actually a pretty good horror film & I don't usually like the haunted house sub-genre. The script by Tommy Lee Wallace based on the book 'Murder in Amityville' by Hans Holzer is well paced, entertaining, has decent characters & tries to tackle a few unexpected issues like incest, the break down of the family unit & wife/child abuse. Unfortunately some of these issues seem a little out of place & are treated in a slightly exploitative & lightweight way. But at the end of the day Amityville II: The Possession is basically a horror film at heart & exploitation is what we want so I'll forgive it. It uses all the haunted house clichés, doors opening & closing on their own, voices, eerie noises, ghostly wind that blows things all over the place, the kind elderly believing priest & spooky hallucinations but Amityville II: The Possession integrates them into the story as well as any other haunted house film. The first half of the film concentrates on these family elements while the second half is all about the possession & eventual exorcism which basically feels like The Exorcist (1973) condensed into 40 odd minutes complete with green vomit, but it moves along nicely & isn't boring. There is some brief nudity but the incest scenes aren't particularly graphic. There isn't much gore or violence, some expanding flesh, some shotgun wounds & a cool looking sequence where someone messily rips the skin off their face to reveal a monster. The acting is solid throughout by all involved but I did find Burt Young's character, the abusive Anthony very unlikeable. Technically Amityville II: The Possession is a strong film, music, photography, editing, special effects & production design are all above average, very polished & better than usual from a low budget horror. Overall I like Amityville II: The Possession a lot more than I thought I would, it's a good solid horror film that kept me entertained for 100 odd minutes & has a little more depth & style than usual without sacrificing the exploitation elements than us horror fans expect & love! Definitely worth watching. |
December 14, 2009 | N/A | |||
| Amityville 1992: It's About Time - R |
Okay I admit it. The Amityville movies are definitely one of my guilty pleasures in life- but hey everyone has a vice right? I just genuinely get excited before I'm about to see another, and so far (with the exception of the incoherent snooze-fest that is Amityville 3/ 3-D) they've all been pretty entertaining. So they aren't highly polished works of art, the standard of acting is variable to say the least, and the series did very quickly descend to made for TV/ straight to video territory. But I find the films to be a lot of fun, and considering the sheer number of sequels (seven and a remake to date) for the most part each film does manage to bring something new to the series, and considering the original concept of a haunted house doesn't lend much in the way of creative flexibility, it has been fun to watch the different ways in which the subject matter is approached. Amityville 1992 : It's About Time (or simply Amityville: It's About Time as it is known on DVD) continues the theme of items from the original Amityville house ending up in new households, only to wreak havoc, as introduced in Amityville: The Evil Escapes. In this case it is an antique clock, which the audience will discover has a history of its own. However, rather than go for the obvious "and then things get thrown around the house and the walls bleed route" the writers have decided to play with the theme of time- we see glimpses of the past, time slows down and speeds up, and events are undone. Yes the premise of course is ultimately silly- time warps don't fit comfortably with Amityville lore, but it does make for a nice twist in the saga. I liked the fact that characters were flawed also- our heroine Lisa (played convincingly by Megan Ward is introduced to us as a woman who is cheating on her psychiatrist boyfriend with an ex she knows she shouldn't get involved with/ Okay it's not groundbreaking stuff, but for the genre of horror it's a nice move away from the virginal stereotypical protagonist. In many other horror films she wouldn't be the female lead, she'd be the prime victim. Expect some unintentionally hilarious dialogue, one of the charms of the Amityville horror movies, and look out for an interesting death scene which reminds me of the Final Destination films- you think you've escaped death by oh no you haven't. In fact it's delivered with (I hope) a real tongue in cheek sense of humour- you'll know what I mean when you see how the poor character is finished off! So to summarise- silly fun that's certainly worth renting. If you've seen the other sequels you'll know what to expect- it won't make for high brow film discussion, but it'll entertain for a couple of hours, and make you laugh a couple of times too. |
December 14, 2009 | N/A | |||
| Amityville - New Generation - R | At the rate these movies are ploughing through the artifacts from the Amityville house it won't be long before we get down to the floorboards, but for now it's a mirror that's causing problems for more cardboard characters in this sixth entry in the series. A homeless man hands it over to artist hairdo Ross Partridge, who then has strange visions and discovers some unpleasant revelations about his past. This mundane horror trundles along at a dull pace, leaving us waiting for a build up that never comes as the various 'spooky' goings-on lead to a dumb finale. Bland and lifeless, with ropey acting and Partridge's huge hair not helping matters. | December 14, 2009 | N/A |
1715 ratings
1359 reviews
