Reviews

18 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
Black Swan (2010)
9/10
Pure Melodrama.
9 January 2011
Warning: Spoilers
Art. Perhaps the sole thing that keeps society rational.

Every day, usually without us realizing, creativity plays a consequential role in our existence. From formulating mathematics to preparing dinner, we must craft different forms of art in order to live. For many, however, art is taken a step further; used to mask insecurity. People devote themselves to their craft, striving to fill a hollow void in their hearts with the insurmountable satisfaction of perfection. These people – Painters, Writers, Architects – Suffer from progressively abraded heartbreak that has been concocted through personal trauma. Subsequently, these tortured souls try to alleviate the pain with artistic fulfillment. Like the typical craftsperson, they won't settle for the orthodox means achievement in their chosen discipline - Stopping at nothing until crossing into the utter and unadulterated realm of perfection. Throughout this journey, bones, bias and bonds are crushed, until the soul is peeled down to its most primitive state, vulnerable to the ghastly poison which lies deep within all of us, only striking when we are at our most weak; madness. Alas, only when this foul sensation grasps us tight in its ineluctable palm of torment and derangement, do we realize that our obsession was the thing that prevented us from reaching perfection in the first place; since, in reality, we were already perfect.

In Darren Aronofsky's slick and seductive melodrama, 'Black Swan', Nina Sayers (Natalie Portman) experiences this exact crisis. Clouded by the overprotectiveness of her Mother (Babara Hershey) and the pressures of being a professional ballerina, Nina crumbles as she is thrust into an existential odyssey of sex, murder and art when she takes on the lead role in Swan Lake and finds herself literally caught between the delicate White Swan, and her diabolical sister, the Black Swan, obsessing over artistic perfection under the wing of both. Along for ride is the enigmatic ballet director, Thomas (Vincent Cassel), and Nina's promiscuous understudy, Lily (Mila Kunis).

This is a brazen film; a sheerly theatrical spectacle of gorgeous visuals, delightfully outlandish performances and the occasional stint of psychedelia, with a beautiful allegory which delves deep into the abstruse and at times horrifying depths of artistry and passion that elevates it to the ranks of masterful. Although, a spellbinding performance from Natalie Portman is what beats at the heart of this story – A mere glint of aberration in her eyes was enough to light up the screen, let alone the raw emotion of some of her more dramatic scenes like the astounding confrontations between her and the also impressive Babara Hershey, her ecstasy fuelled sexual voyage with the ridiculously seductive Mila Kunis, and the breathtaking finale in which Nina's epiphany crests in one of the most powerful sequences of the year.

Furthermore, I'm delighted with Aronofsky's development as a filmmaker. He has officially cemented himself as one of the best contemporary auteurs with his unprecedented ability to interpret, mold, and above all, understand characters. He lets Nina's journey unfold in the most delicate of ways, letting the pictorial devices of the scenery and the ambiance of the brilliant score tell her story on an aesthetic scale, which ultimately works in impeccable harmony with Portman's personification. He, too, utilizes his natural cognition of art and its perplexity to give the narrative a decisively intimate feel from deep in his own complex, maybe also confound creative heart. As the final frames glitter upon screen, and Nina takes her climatic leap of faith, landing on the mattress with the sore realization that she was, in fact, perfect before she was consumed by the pursuit of immaculence – Through the haunting line "I was perfect" – The filmmaking makes you almost feel the tears of emotion streaming down Aronofsky's face as he, himself, beholds his character complete her final arc.

In short, it's all incredibly good cinema.

~~
0 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Somewhere (2010)
8/10
The Cons of Fame.
5 January 2011
Not many contemporary filmmakers have an aesthetic as unique as Sophia Coppola's. She has this delightful, dare I say natural ability to embellish her scenes with flavor, even if the subject matter is dull. Indeed, if a film is virtually about nothing, she can still use her adroitness to compose gorgeous visuals and intriguing characters which instigate momentum with the mere beauty of their artistry. This approach is hardly for everyone, but for the right niche, her craft is simply delicious.

'Somewhere' tells the minimalistic story of a jaded movie star (Stephen Dorff) whose life has been consumed by apathy. Wasting his days away in the infamous Château Marmont, he falls asleep during pole dances, perpetually drives his Ferrari around, and indulges in the company of many women – Occasionally falling asleep between their legs.

He has it all, and that's precisely his problem; he has nothing to work for. Everything is set out on a platter for him. Things like the fulfillment of accomplishment or the ecstasy of sex have been spoiled, faded into the sombre norm. The way he aimlessly meanders about his life, sheerly dissolute as he is bathed in fittingly dim yellow and gray pictorial devices, makes for some truly graceful, hypnotic cinema.

Coppola, assisted by fantastic performance from Dorff, lets this fascinating character build the scenery and action around him; letting us indulge in his jubilance when his daughter arrives, yet also the anguish as he helplessly rants to his ex-wife in a drunken, helpless slew. The direction makes it all feel so intimate; genuine. Johnny Marco feels like a real person, a bloke you could run into at the pub. You feel sympathy for him being thrust into this artificial hell. He isn't a mere entertainment symbol – He's a person, a passionate and angelic thespian who has been devoured by the machine.

Coppola wanted to create a definitive allegory which delves head-first into the materialistic aspects of showbiz which have diluted the actual art. The film is an at times bleak, vibrant, heart-warming and majestic eye opener, for both the players of Hollywood and us.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
[Rec]² (2009)
9/10
Grab a bucket a bucket popcorn, turn the speakers up and get a few beers into you - It's zombie killing time!
29 December 2010
Mere minutes after the conclusion of 'REC', a crack SWAT team is sent into the dreaded apartment complex to control the deadly contagion within. As a fight for their lives ensues, they come to the realization that they have been sent on a suicide mission, unknownst to the true, biblical proportions of what they are to do.

Even more so than its predecessor - which is hard to believe, I know - REC 2 is a high octane, balls-to-the-wall, thrill ride of a film. Seriously, after the few minutes of banter between the protagonists, you won't be able to take a breather for the next eighty minutes. Better yet, this ferocious filmmaking somehow - and I mean somehow - manages to work in harmony with expertly crafted, atmospherically-elicited scares. It may be a sheerly lucky mesh that these components work so well together, but I don't give a rats, because it makes for some damn fine cinema.

There are countless scenes which will have you squirming in your seat as you dread the inevitable terror that looms within the shadows, ready to jump into frame. Mind you, you will find no 'cheap jump scares' in this film; rather, every jolt is built up superb tension, suspense and atmospheric potency. It is a film made by people who know how to penetrate our instincts of fear and perturbation.

The performances have a dazzling sense of realism to them, as you go on the same journey of fear, enmity and ultimately existential ambivalence as these ordinary men are faced with such unadulterated, unimaginable, thought-to-be impossible evil. You can almost smell the foul scent of flesh as they saunter into the next ghastly, gore-stricken room.

The hand-held camera premise is handled masterfully. It isn't used to a point of excess where the action is incomprehensible, yet it isn't too placid as it still manages to maintain a rousingly frenetic feel.

Overall, this is pedal-to-the-metal stuff with a dash of sophistication to ice the cake. I loved it - and I don't see how many horror fans won't. As the DVD case suggests, it's to REC as what Dawn of the Dead was to Night of the Living Dead.
3 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Devil (2010)
7/10
A taut, tense and twisting thriller.
4 December 2010
Aside from the boisterous twelve year olds and the dim glare of mobile phones in the audience (teaches me to go to the theatre at 6:30 on a Saturday night), I managed to enjoy this little thriller. It was a brisk ride from start to finish, keeping me feverishly guessing with every dramatic reveal and twist that was constantly thrown at me. It was definitely overwhelming, but I can't deny it fit the film's frenetic tone perfectly. Despite being your typical stereotypes, the characters were nonetheless intriguing and capable of driving the film through its gloriously convoluted plot as each of them possessed a genuine air of menace; I, for one, couldn't pick the proclaimed 'devil'.

However, I felt that the decent suspense that was established could've been even more potent if a few niggling pacing issues were adequately dealt with during post. It was tense, sure, but it felt like a piece of the puzzle was missing that had the potential to make it a real nail-biter. On top of that, there was unintentional comedy, poor performances and laughable dialogue here and there, but all this basically reaffirmed that 'Devil' is simply dumb fun through and through. Nothing too fancy.

Thoughts?
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Clever, tense and always intriguing.
25 November 2010
Warning: Spoilers
As a film-crew indulge in him, Reverend and Renowned 'Exorcist' Cotton Marcus (Patrick Fabian) travels to a rural Louisiana farmhouse upon urgent request. When he arrives, he meets the shrewd Louis Sweetzer (Louis Herthum) and his isolated daughter Nell (Ashley Bell); who Louis believes is possessed by a demon of some sort. Marcus initially pawns these claims off as delusions as he stages a series of phony tactics in hope to heal Louis of his ill thoughts, and, furthermore, rake in dough for his struggling family.

But, as Marcus sifts deeper into the bizarre workings of the Sweetzer farm and their surrounding town, he soon comes to suspect things are more sinister than he first thought...

Reverend Cotton Marcus is a peculiar fellow -- Some may pawn his pseudo-exorcisms off as cheap trickery, whilst others may commend him for showing bible thumpers the error of their ways. Truth is, these exorcisms are a mixture of both; as is the man. The way this fascinating character reacts to the case of Nell is simply great cinema, and sets a solid core. The contrast between his light-hearted skepticism, mutual fright, and eventual atonement is pitch-perfect on all cylinders, providing us with a fantastic character-study amongst this intriguing little film. Essentially, the heart of this is how Marcus deals with the ambiguity he faces at every ominous turn of the farmhouse. Could Nell be a neglected child in need of help? Could she actually be possessed? Is her father a raging psychopath or a genuinely concerned father? All this uncertainty leads Marcus to a baffling crossroads, as he is forced to question his very self as he battles evil; whatever it may actually be.

My interpretation of the film is quite straightforward; there was no demon, only a delusional satanic cult and an unstable girl who strived for attention due to her constricted life. The baby at the end was a mere conventional infant. Nell was just fishing for attention, and ultimately, social acceptance. The flame at the end was a typical by-product of when something gets burned (in this case, a completely normal baby). Strangely, the part of the film that made me skeptical was when Nell officered Marcus a "Blowing Job" when she was supposedly possessed; it sounded exactly how an innocent, unknowing sixteen year old girl would phrase it when striving for attention, like she feebly overheard in on the bus or something.

The performances were nothing short of brilliant. Cotton Marcus was played with deftly subtle angst and stale humour behind his corny gung-ho attitude, which ultimately crafted a genuinely layered character as his uncertainty began to leak through. Nell was portrayed perfectly down to every last eerie glint in her eyes; her merry attitude had a clever yet oh so delicate menace to it, whilst her ferocity was explicitly terrifying yet kept that tiny shred of ambiguity to her true creed. Louis was a pitch-perfect hillbilly dad; the way you could never truly discern whether he was sincere or simply saw through all the crap of Marcus was paramount for the sustained tension of the film.

Of course though, for these performances to truly prosper, great writing and direction was needed. Andrew Gurland penned a slow-burning, ambiguous and largely character-driven screenplay, yet the action was always taut and never lagged. Daniel Stamm, a man who obviously knows his horror, directed the film phenomenally for a first time effort as he managed to chill me on multiple occasions with his precise craft. Admittedly, gave me a slight glimmer of hope for his forthcoming 'Martyrs' reduex. If he doesn't get clouded by the Hollywood machine, I can honestly see this man directly quality cinema for years to come.

All in all, this is one of the better if not best horrors of the year. It's creepy, interpretive, atmospheric, shocking and all-round macabre awesomeness for someone of my taste. It may not be typical fodder for mainstream audiences, but nonetheless, I can't help but recommend everyone to give it a spin; I found it to be a blast of a film.
3 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Machete (2010)
8/10
A genuine homage.
13 November 2010
Warning: Spoilers
In the midst of an immigration crisis, a Mexican day labourer known only as Machete (Danny Trejo) attempts to assassinate the fruitless Senator McLaughlin (Robert De Niro), only to be shot and left for dead by the very people who hired him. But, unfortunately for them, Machete is actually alive and ready to return to the glorious days of being a Federale as he, aided by a plethora of sharp objects, slashes his way to bitter revenge. Although, as the fiasco soon grows into a colossal war of race across the border, Machete realizes this mess goes a whole lot deeper than he initially expected...

Like many classic exploitation romps, Machete has intentionally corny subtext as well as ridiculously excessive violence. The immigration issue is obviously something very close to Robert Rodriguez, and he conveys everything he has to say about it as he does best; through celluloid. His disdain is explicit down to every last bumbling redneck meeting the ferocious blade of Machete. One of the more overtone-rich scenes is towards the end where the Senator is helplessly stumbling across the border fence, and a bunch of sociopathic rednecks mistake him as a Mexican as they shoot him dead in cold blood; simply, this is Rodriguez encouraging all the right-wing extremists of Texas to, for a moment, put themselves in the shoes of a refugee. Perhaps, this may be the most poignant scene of a very intriguing film.

As you would expect, all this subtext isn't subtle in the slightest sense; it's overbearing and incredibly crude like the majority of exploitation films that trod this fickle path back in the day. But heck, you can't deny that Rodriquez has crafted one helluva' genuine homage through this deft accuracy, as he nails the tone of exploitation as well as carrying on with the visceral components that have become popular in recent mainstream cinema.

Of course, the blood comes in gallons as Machete offs his adversaries in creatively excessive and ridiculous fashion - A personal favourite of mine would be when Machete swings out a window with an intestine in tow. The writing is a mere reflection of the cheese and sleaze of trashy cinema, packed to the brim with hilarious one-liners and slapstickery. The cast is nothing short of awesome as it meshes insanely beautiful women, acclaimed actors, B-Grade powerhouses and dirty Hollywood whores for strikingly wide pallet of personalities who light up the screen in their own special ways. The sword-fight between Danny Trejo and Steven Seagal was utter awesomeness incarnate.

Overall, this is a fun and genuine homage to B-Grade cinema. I recommend it to all genre fans, plus people who just want a good time at the movies. Viva Mexploitation!
6 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Saw 3D (2010)
8/10
Bloody, thrilling and chock-full of twists - If it's Halloween, it must be Saw!
31 October 2010
Warning: Spoilers
Starting where Saw VI left off, Jill (Betsy Russell) flees the scene and subsequently seeks police-protection after she fails to fulfill her Husband's wishes in killing Hoffman (Costas Mandylor). Enraged and hungry for vengeance, Hoffman embarks on a mission to kill her and ultimately emerge as Jigsaw's unchallenged successor. Meanwhile, Bobby Dagen (Sean Patrick Flannery), a self-help guru and past 'survivor' of a Jigsaw trap, is forced to partake in another brutal game as he desperately fights his way through a series of horrifying tests in order to save his wife (Gina Holden) from the clutches of a sinister device.

All I have to say is this: HELL YEAH! This was one of the most entertaining, downright fun films of the year. The blood came in gallons, it was nail-bitingly suspenseful, and despite its arguable predictability, the twist was amazing. With my immense Saw fanboyism noted, I can still guarantee that you don't need to be familiar with nor a fan of the series to enjoy this; anyone who can appreciate a bloody, unpretentious B-Movie romp should have a blast. The series started as a harmlessly fun B-Grade thriller, and it will end as one too. Sure, things may have gotten convoluted in the midst of this phenomenally dense story, but in the end, the essence from the first film is still gloriously alive and thriving.

The gore was nothing short of INSANE. I'm not exaggerating here. Blood sprayed, limbs flew, heads exploded; it was an utterly theatrical spectacle. As always, the writing was taut, twisting and tremendous. The final twist was predictable as hell, but how can you rightfully tell me it wasn't one of the most epic sequences in the history of this series!? As a die-hard Saw fan, I was cheering and first-pumping in my seat as it unfolded before me. It was pure art. The traps were utterly brutal, they had me constantly squirming and cringing in my seat as I couldn't help but morbidly cherish the sensation. It's amazing how fresh and innovative they can still be even after six installments. The performances weren't the best (Namely, Chad Donella's portrayal of the one-dimensional detective 'Gibson' was pretty bad), as duly expected, but there were nice flourishes of brilliance from Sean Patrick Flannery in his portrayal of the intriguing character of Bobby Dagen. Betsy Russell and Costas Mandylor were adequate as respective nemesis's.

All in all, this is an incredibly entertaining thrill ride. Although as a Saw fanatic, I can't help but feel a little unsatisfied by the climax. The revelations beg for more sequels, plus ending with Hoffman getting locked alive in the Bathroom is hardly a concrete conclusion. I like ambiguity, but everything felt a little too open-ended.

Otherwise, it's a bloody blast of a film. Whether you hate the series or love it, I advise you to switch off your brain and merely bask in the glory of the Saw universe. You can't deny that these films will define this generation of horror. 9/10.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
A horrifying piece of art.
30 October 2010
Warning: Spoilers
Milos (Srdjan Todorovic), an aging porn star, is struggling to support his family through tough times in the thick of contemporary Serbia. But, when he is offered big bucks to star in a pornographic 'art' film helmed by the bombastic Vukmir (Sergej Trifunovic), he seizes the opportunity in a hope to garner enough money to never have to degrade himself in a porno again. At first the shoot seems typical enough, with Milos forced to partake in petty yet somewhat bizarre sexuality... But before long, Vukmir's direction grows increasingly sinister, as Milos is plunged into a world of depravity and filth, and forced to fight for his life in the horrifying nightmare that is 'A Serbian Film'.

I was left utterly speechless as the credits rolled. My jaw was dropped, my face was blank, I was mortified. The emotional toll this film takes on you is beyond extreme, it's profound. The last act is ridiculously gruelling; I was pushed to edge, arguably more so than I've been with any other film in my life. Everything was so graphic; incredibly realistic; immoral. Yet, despite how harrowed I was, I can't help but feel admiration for the creators of this repugnance. For one, they succeeded in disturbing me to the bone (something that rarely happens), and for two, they had the balls to make a statement about their dismay towards the Serbian government with a film as controversial as this. Vukmir, the pretentious director, was a cumulative representation of past and present Serbian political regime; at first he came to Milos with pseudo promises of wealth and prosperity, but as the lies slowly become blatant, it becomes clear that he has merely manipulated Milos into exploiting himself and everything he holds dear. Even with Vukmir's defeat in the climax, another more powerful director (or dictator) simply takes his place as he orders his thugs to rape the corpses of Milos and his dead family as the cameras roll. This a ballsy piece of cinema, to say the least.

Surprisingly, the film is very competent on technical levels. Nemanja Jovanov's cinematography is crisp and sickening. He succeeds in making the third act a visually surreal nightmare and as well as capturing the atrocities on-screen with deft precision and flair. The performances are nothing short of fantastic. From the sexually ailing Milos to his sexually frustrated brother, the portrayals are realistic and intriguing. The screenplay is also quite decent. Despite arguably lagging a little in the second act, the writing redeems itself with one big, sadistic creative flourish in the final act. Whoever came up with this stuff is a morbid genius. Should he be congratulated or condemned? That, my fickle reader, you must find out for yourself.

Overall, this is one memorable cinematic journey. I will never forget the harrowing ninety-minutes I spent sitting in the dark as my morals and ethics were systematically captivated and crushed by the eerie glow of 'A Serbian Film' as it played on my laptop. What is my general consensus on this film, you ask? Well, if a piece of art can affect me as much as this one did, it must be good.

8/10.
6 out of 19 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Despite not entirely living up to the original, Paranormal Activity 2 is still another grueling excerise in subtle, intimate terror
20 October 2010
Warning: Spoilers
Happening in the months leading up to its hit 2009 predecessor, Paranormal Activity 2 follows Katie's sister and her family as they experience a series of similar paranormal phenomenon in their home. Determined to get to the bottom of the increasingly threatening occurrences, they decide to set up a net of security cameras in and around the house to see what really goes bump in the night. Alas the terror only escalates, pushing each of them to their breaking points as they confront a ruthless being that feeds off their very woe and angst, that sickeningly wallows in their fear until revealing its final master plan...

Despite arguably cloning original's formula, this is still a largely enjoyable and chilling sequel. Although if you weren't a fan of the original's slow-burning and brooding terror, I find it hard to see you appreciating this. It stays true to the original's creed, taking time to develop characters and subtle tension as it slowly creates an increasingly suffocating repertoire of intimate horror. The 'evil' remains invisible and shrouded in eerie shadows for the most part, playing at the terror your imagination can evoke as opposed to visceral scares. The final twenty minutes is essentially a resonation of all the progressive tension built up, hitting hard with almost unbearable suspense and thrilling scare sequences that bring the film home intensely right until the very last disturbingly grim frame.

But with all that being said, I can't say it totally measures up to the original's level of brilliance. The security camera shots were a little corny and didn't have the effectiveness of the infamous darkened bedroom shot in the original. I also found the acting to be considerably weaker and the pacing a tad off the potency of the original.

Nevertheless, the film captures the essence of brooding, intimate horror perfectly; which is most vital.

I won't spoil anything too major, but I will say it ties in with the original's story with surprising competence. Katie plays a major role, whilst Micah also makes a couple of appearances. Oh, and it most definitely sets up for another sequel. Paramount are obviously pushing hard to make this the next big horror franchise.

Overall, I was yet again sufficiently creeped out and satisfied by this second journey into the 'Paranormal Activity' universe. The characters were detailed and layered as they faced interesting personal demons as well the evil that haunted them, the atmosphere was great as it focused predominantly on stark and foreboding imagery, and best of all, it wasn't a lame Hollywoodization of good non mainstream material - It kept absolutely true to the tone of Oren Peli's subtle yet profound masterpiece, as well as adding interesting twists and turns to the intriguing story.

8/10. If you loved and/or were scared by the previous installment, check this bad boy out. It won't disappoint.
72 out of 115 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
A fun, balls-to-the-wall creature feature.
14 September 2010
Warning: Spoilers
In the wake of the terror she and her friends endured at the hands of the monstrous Crawlers during their spelunking trip in 'The Descent', Sarah Carter (Shauna Macdonald) miraculously emerges from the godforsaken caves bloody, distraught and at a complete loss of memory. As hard as he tries, local enforcer Roger Payne (Doug Ballard) can't elicit much more than a delusional mumble from her when he asks about the whereabouts of the remaining girls. Recklessly, he decides to assemble a crack team of spelunkers to accompany Sarah back into the caves in a hope of jogging her memory and hopefully locating the other missing girls.

As they venture deeper and deeper into the bleak, ominous depths of the caverns, Sarah gradually manages to recall the past horrors which befall upon her. But will it all be too late? The heart of this film is a glorious, balls-to-the-wall creature feature with a shawl of beautiful stark atmosphere. The blood comes in gallons, the Crawlers are as disgustingly foul as ever and there is ample dread at every point of the grim, foreboding caverns. Jon Harris' direction is fantastic, capturing the mood of claustrophobia perfectly. Also contributing to the brilliant sense of unease is the cast, who all convey isolation and fear with realism and deftly crafted trauma. All this is packed nice and taut with swift scripting and editing, ridding any notions of dullness which could potentially develop in the repetitive setting.

Two of my favourite parts include the underwater segment and Cath being trapped amongst the boulders - both portray the utter anxiety of claustrophobia and physical isolation perfectly. The ending was also cool; I love me a hopeless, downbeat climax.

All in all, I dug the hell out this delightfully bleak creature feature. I highly recommend it.
15 out of 23 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Piranha 3D (2010)
8/10
A delightfully gruesome way to end the '10 Summer movie season.
27 August 2010
Warning: Spoilers
Excessive gore? Check. Juggling boobies? Check. A number of other crazed antics including Eli Roth's head exploding and Ving Rhames carving up prehistoric piranhas with a boat motor? A big check, motherf-cker.

During Spring Break, Lake Victoria is invaded by hordes of drunken, horny youths ready to party and f-ck the weekend away. Sure, we don't give a rats about anything except their boobs and possibly asses, but who cares in the slightest sense!? Anyhow, an underwater tremor sets free thousands of deadly prehistoric piranhas in the lake, and as I'm sure you've already pieced together, a fathomless wave of blood, chomping and more blood ensues as a ragtag porn crew fight for their lives amongst the madness.

It wasn't as exploitive as I expected (mainly due to the barrage of hype which suddenly came in the past week), but I had a blast nonetheless. There wasn't a moment where anything was taken too seriously, and tongue was firmly planted in cheek all the way through. From the amusing cameos to increasingly ridiculous sequences, it was pure cheesy gold. This was backed up by nice glowing and vibrant cinematography, INSANE gore and a constant sense of delightful fun. The CGI was subpar, yes, but I couldn't help but deem it fitting.

On the note of the renowned underwater ballet, it seems that I'm the only one who was left underwhelmed. I was hoping for at least a little action between the two and some closer shots, but alas all that came of it was an awkward, seemingly forced scene.

But otherwise, I really dug it as a guilty pleasure. 7.5/10.
0 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Wolfman (2010)
4/10
As the cliché goes, a missed opportunity at greatness. . .
12 February 2010
The original 'Wolf Man' proved to be a fantastic, influential horror film which withstood the test of time with style. It came as a surprise that a large proportion of the horror community gradually began anticipating the eventual remake (including myself), in the midst of this harshly received and seemingly never ending barrage of them.

Tonight, after many delays and rumoured production problems, I finally managed to catch a screening of this Wolfman re imagining... Was it as good as the original? No. Did it live up to the hype? No. Did it have redeeming qualities? Yes.

The main and most noticeable issue here was the horrendous editing and pacing. Think of it like a gaping hole where the infamous screaming face should be in 'The Scream'. The acting and cinematography was amazing, but the glue that should hold all it all together was no where to be found. All the faults you heard about in post-production were sadly true.

It's a darn shame, because everything else seemed sublime. Shelly Johnson, Phil Harvey and John Dexter managed to do justice to the original with their starkly beautiful images providing sheer candy for the eyes. It all came together to construct a stunning atmosphere full of dread... it was only too bad the editing constantly murdered any hope of sufficient tension to go along with it.

The cast was brilliant. Weaving and Hopkins managed to steal the show with their immense acting talents shown in somewhat gala fashion; they went out there, with all the fan respect they each have on their shoulders, and simply chewed scenery, plus, most importantly, had fun. It paid off greatly in their net performances.

Del Toro and Blunt also went quite well. They obviously didn't have the expertise as the above two men, but their on-screen relationship nevertheless oozed chemistry, and even left me a little heartbroken by the end (which is always good).

Andrew Kevin Walker's phenomenal screenplay had it's flourishes, but ultimately lost most of it's magic in the motions of this transitional nightmare.

In the end, The Wolfman is (as the cliché goes) a severely missed opportunity at greatness. It was a film that didn't deserve the sh-t it went through in post-production. But then again, I hear they'll restore 17 minutes of cut footage on the DVD... so I'll probably wind up waiting eagerly... again.

6.5/10
8 out of 19 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Saw VI (2009)
8/10
Surprisingly good
23 October 2009
Finally, the Saw series has regained some of it's previous credibility. Saw VI proved to be a very bloody, but clever mainstream romp.

There were a couple of great twists and turns, the gore was jacked up to a fantastic level of brutal extremity (easily beating the rather tame 5th installment), and most importantly, I, plus everyone in the theatre had a ball with it.

As well as being a valid continuation of the 'Saw' story, it worked well as a standalone film. The main twist actually had nothing do to with the previous movies... but don't get me wrong, you'll get plenty of answers for questions left open from the other films at the same time.

As you'd expect, the acting and production values weren't to flash, but the good screenplay and balls-out sadistic torture made this a vast improvement over the last couple of sequels. Apart from the first, I'm happy to say this is definitely one of my favorites from the series. 7.5/10.

Check it out. I found it to be a pleasant surprise.
67 out of 105 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Australia (2008)
9/10
Australia is a stunning and beautiful film !
2 December 2008
This film was simply beautiful, the visuals alone were worth the admission price. We were thrust from different and unique settings from all around the Northen Territory of Australia in heartbeats, like the posh side of Darwin to the rugged, harsh desert.

The film itself started in a manner that diffed from everyone's expectations, as it was very comical and over the top, but, after the first twenty minutes it calmed down and descended into a powerful drama. I personally didn't like these opening minutes, as I felt it didn't chime in well to the rest of the film.

The cast did well, but I really did feel Hugh Jackam stole the show in his role as The Drover.

Some CGI was used, but mainly the effects were stunning, such as climax with the bombing of Darwin which had me on the edge of my seat.

Overall, Australia is a very good film which has some minor flaws. I recommend seeing it in theatres though, because it is a very fun experience. 8.5/10 (f1ck the critics) BTW, it sticks with you after watching as it is a depressing film. But, some may see the ending as somewhat happy.
6 out of 14 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Dying Breed (2008)
4/10
Mixed bag
8 November 2008
I just got back from seeing Dying Breed and it was quite a mixed bag.

It took at least 50 minutes for the main action to begin. The first act got repetitive, dull and boring quickly as our four main characters seemed to do nothing and just chat. Don't get me wrong, I love character development, but they could have taken about ten minutes off the first act. There were many pointless scenes.

The other bad factor was the acting. Leigh Whannel sadly gave a poor performance, as well as all the other members in the group of four.

Onto the good, the gore was excellent and the film had that raw and gritty feel to it. Some scenes were creepy and disturbing. Also, the ending was very good and a fitting climax to the film.

Overall, this is an above average Aussie horror with many flaws and clichés, but still manages to entertain. A very generous 7/10.
19 out of 32 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Saw V (2008)
4/10
Decent
23 October 2008
Saw V was a decent film, but sadly it is nothing compared to the first 4 and is the weakest of the lot.

I felt the acting was very poor at times from most of the cast, but Tobin Bell still managed a very good performance as the sick and twisted "Jigsaw", it's a shame he didn't get much screen time.

The other problem I had with the film was that it didn't really feel like a saw film while watching, it seemed like they wanted to focus on the drama more than the actual traps. But with saying that, the main game with Malick, Brit, Luba, Charles and Ashley is VERY well done and entertaining, it's a shame they didn't show it more.

Overall, this is a pretty good film, with a bit of a let down ending (but still shocking).

PS. The rating would have been higher if they focused on the group game more.
55 out of 105 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Frozen Flesh (2008 Video)
1/10
Terrible.
19 August 2008
If you can watch this P.O.S to end, you deserve a pat on the back.

This the single worst horror film ever made. There are seven scenes in the whole film, one of which that includes a man stabbing the air for seventy minutes.

Also, There is no real story and the red tone color gave me a headache.

Overall, there is nothing much else to say about this mess. It can hardly even be thought of as a film, just random shots of nothing.

Please take my warning: Never (and I mean never) even consider watching this trash.

Justin French = Talentless hack.
15 out of 17 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Very dark and sad.
16 July 2008
I just got back from an advance IMAX screening of The Dark Knight down here in Sydney, it was a full house and I was forced to sit right at the front of the theater, which is not the best for IMAX viewing ! Anyway, the film is by far the darkest superhero film I have ever seen.

Heath Ledger did excellent in his chilling portrayal of The Joker, every scene he was in brought a mix of dark humor and scariness to the table. Micheal Caine, Gary Oldman & Christan Bale also did quite well.

Onto the bulk of the film, I felt the movie was going great up until the hospital blew up, from that point on some very unneeded action scenes took place. The film would have been MUCH better if they just went to the final scene and cut out the boat bit.

The length was also a factor, many scenes could and should have been cut.

Overall, this is a dark and depressing superhero flick with some excellent performances, but it falls apart a bit in the final act. 8.5/10 I liked Begins more.
8 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed