Reviews

When the oft forgotten horror anthology series 'Freddy's Nightmares' first aired in 1989, it debuted with origin story of Freddy Krueger. News of seeing Freddy before he became the terrifying dream demon of Elm Street was like Easter and Christmas coming all at once for horror fans. And the cherry on top was that horror legend Tobe Hooper (Texas Chainsaw Massacre, Poltergeist, Death Trap) was in the director's chair. Currently, this episode is still the closest thing we have to an official prequel (sans the flashbacks in 'Freddy's Dead'). So you would think "No More Mr. Nice Guy" would hold a high ranking place in the Elm St. Canon with fans as opposed the being confined to horror obscurity. Unfortunately, what should have been a killer opening for the series, is just a very below average late 1980's horror television show that looks more and more dated as time passes.

Hooper (straight off the chaotic flop 'Chainsaw 2'), almost completely abandons his usual anarchic and colourful visual smarts and delivers something that's very bland (sadly a sign of the depths he would later sink to as a direct-to- video director). The cinematography is straight low-budget cable, with cameras nailed to the floor. The few scenes with Hooper's trademark colour and lighting, is countered by the many scenes of cheesy VHS standard filters and cheap frame-by-frame slow motion that's better suited to a third-tier hair metal band on mid 80's MTV.

Englund's presence is nice, but with no decent dialogue , special effects and 80's TV censorship standards, he can do nothing else but go into auto-pilot mode and make the best out of some weak one-liners. Fans of the series will be disappointed that none of the characters from the first movie (such as Lt. Donald Thompson) are to be seen. However, it did provide fans at the time a basic (if disguised by shadows) look at pre-burnt Freddy until two years later in Freddy's Dead: The Final Nightmare.

But the most noticeable issue with this episode is the appalling acting, most notability, the wooden performance given by lead actor Ian Patrick Williams (as Lt. Blocker - the cop who, while arresting Krueger, forgets to read him his Miranda Rights which leads to Krueger's release(!)). Since the story centres around Broker, his jilted, zombie like delivery completely throws off scenes to the point of being an annoyance.

One positive highlight is Hili Park's performance (Merit Blocker - Blocker's daughter) who does give a creepy performance as the Krueger survivor.

Overall, its a a huge disappointment if you're looking for a definitive prequel. Only worth it for hardcore fans who want to check out a time capsule from the 'Freddy-mania' days.

I would have at least given this film a 4/10 for effort, but even at 90 minutes it's a rough movie to sit through. Rafal Zielinski (director of 'Fun (1994)' and the underrated 80's teen comedy 'Screwballs (1983)') attempts to capture the zany spirit of the 1960's 'Beach Party' movies but instead delivers a very flat movie. It's a 1990's MTV music video without the music.

The Corey's and supporting cast (bar Robert Mandan and Geoffrey Lewis as the old movie star rivals), don't seem to know how to give the silly material the energy it needs to even make it passable. So the film feels like it's missing something from the beginning. After the 50 minute mark, the wacky antics that try to disguise who direction- less this film is, will wear you down.

By the last 20 minutes (if you're still watching) even a cameo by Zelda Rubinstein won't be any relief. 90's comedy-rock outfit, Dread Zeppelin pad out the running time in the last few minutes (before the credits even roll!!!), with a final pointless music video montage.

Overall you would have to be an insane Corey's fanatic to sit through this. I don't give out 1/10 scores often but this film really did try my patients to breaking point.

On paper, this is a film that should have been at least in the lower end of the top 10 SNL films. Even the switching of Aykroyd and Belushi's usual roles of "wild-man/straight-man" was a stroke of genius. However Neighbors is a complete car crash of a movie.

The infamous production problems really show as the pacing in the film is all over the place. The film and the actors seem to be giving it all they have, but essentially go nowhere.

What is meant to set in a few hours seems like several days - the film doesn't build. A good example of this is the main protagonist, Earl. Belushi plays him well, but can only do so much in the context of this fragmented film. When his character finally makes the turn near the end of the film, it seems like it comes straight out of the blue. The audience can get a sense of his frustration as Vic and his partner Ramona mercilessly torture him, but his big revelation in the films new "up-beat" ending, doesn't seem logical. There are no signposts to show his character evolving from the man we met at the start of the film; he just turns because film-logic says he has too.

Also, for such an offbeat comedy; the direction of John G. Avildsen is at best – very flat and functional. The actors seem to be doing all the work for themselves as the camera is firmly nailed to the ground. You can see why Aykroyd and Belushi complained he knew nothing about comedy and wanted to take over the rains.

Over all Neighbors is an interesting curio, but sadly a missed opportunity, given this was Belushi's swansong as an actor.

The final (and most infamous) film by The Beatles is a fly-on-the-wall documentary that captures the band during the tense rehearsal and recording sessions for what would turn out to be the last album released by the group.

The biggest problem with this movie is that the movie itself doesn't live up to it's legend. This film is like finding a stack your best friends holiday movies and watching them without your friend telling you where they where shot or what was happening in them. In the context of cinema verite, this could be an exciting prospect, however even the films of cinema verite throw you a few bones now and then.

If you didn't know anything about the Fab Four's later years this is what you'll get out this movie: a band jamming in sound stage then cut away to the band jamming in building then cut away to the band jamming on roof - the end. The film only works if you have piror knowledge of the events of early 1969 that lead to the band demise. Thus film itself suffers from the same hurdle that most rock movies of this time come across: a lack of narrative. Why are they on the roof? What is the building they're jamming in, are they recording? Where's the control room or desk? Worst of all, is that out of nearly a month of filming there was the footage that could rectify this.

In 1996's 'The Beatles Anthology' we got the scenes of the band and crew discussing the concert on the roof, talking to the crew about why they chose a sound stage and more importantly the aims of the whole 'Get Back' project. In this version, we don't even get a hint that there's a project going on in the first place.

Even adding some subtitles at the bottom of the screen could give the audience members who aren't fanboys a clue of time and place. Instead what we have is film that's mostly performance based with a collection of random and bearly auditable sound bites. What could have been a study in the disintegration of a major rock group becomes the first example of those "on-tour" DVD's that show your favourite band goofing off to hand held cameras for 70 minutes.

The one scene that does give us a clue is the infamous Paul and George argument. This one scene jump out of nowhere as if the editor forgot to cut it out. The rest of the film, however has a very light and somewhat directionless feel to it.

On it's first cut, this film ran for an epic 3 1/2 hours and included many of the mentioned scenes including when Peter Sellers visits the band during a session. But all this was trimmed down by The Beatles (without J & Y) to a short 80 minutes on only it's second cut. And Lindsay-Hogg, not knowing (like the rest of the world) that the Beatles were almost through, saw no other option then to put together a scatter-shot fluff piece from hundreds of hours worth of footage to fulfil a six year old contract the band had with United Artists from way back in the Beatlemania days.

If this film ever gets re-released, it would be great to see a total redux. This would include all the meetings the band has with the crew, the on camera interviews with Paul and of course some of the tense moments that occurred while making the movie. Yes, there is the famous scene of Paul and George arguing over how the lead to 'I've Got A Feeling' should be played but for the rest of the bickering that most Beatles fans have heard on bootlegs of outtakes have all been glossed over.

On the positive side - the performances are great. Even if 'Let It Be' did boast some of the fabs weakest efforts the music is still worth sitting through the seemingly pointless scenes of dialogue. In saying this, 'Let It Be' is not a bad movie, in fact I'd say it's a great movie that's been miss treated and poorly hacked up. Which is why it's only worth it if you know enough already to read between the lines.

Taking the story away from the small rural town of Gatling was a smart move, as the third instalment of the Corn series plays out like the thriller that the first one was meant to be. Daniel Cerny is excellent as the evil brother Eli Porter, being hands down the best in the long line-up of evil child cult leaders. Unfortunately, this all comes unstuck because of the film's tiny budget and straight to video standards. The unevenness of the special effects become obvious, even annoying, during the last 20 minutes. The films finale a ridiculous looking giant monster, sees a B+ telemovie turn into Z grade crap (complete with blue screen matted monster and Barbie dolls being eating by the dozens). Besides the disappointing ending, COTC 3 is not a bad entry into a pretty below average series.