Reviews

Actors: Sara Paxton, Alyssa Diaz, Dustin Milligan, Katharine McPhee, and Joel David Moore.

Plot: A group of college kids head on up to their friend Sarah's lake house, on a secluded Louisiana lake. But much to their demise what they do not know is that this salt water lake is infested with various species of sharks. The question is how did they get into this lake and why? ACTING: Not much to say, it's a horror movie. Beside let's face it they are only as good as the script permits.

TONE: Serious and dark horror movie, with a huge lack of thrills and suspense.

SCRIPT: A "B" movie script. I will say the concept is MOSTLY original. Cheesy all around, dry humour (wait was their any?). Scream meets Jaws (that's a first!).

PROS: Entertaining (for viewers with a respect for "B" movies). Cool variety of sharks.

CONS: Rather ludicrous (no matter which way you flip the coin). Dissatisfying shark attacks and not nearly enough carnage for this genre. You hardly see the sharks.

VERDICT: Whatever you do DO NOT BUY this movie BEFORE PREVIEWING it because I guarantee, you will be disappointed. I am one of those who bought this film before previewing, and I knew the risks. I don't regret this purchase because under the RIGHT circumstances this film is extremely mindless and fun to watch in all of it's awfulness (sometimes you just have to love it for what it is). I will say that I do love the irony the film conveys, the antagonists are filming the shark attacks (sound like another scary movie that just came out not too long before? --> "Scream 4") and one of the character's say that people would pay to see some sharks eating people (isn't that what WE paid to see?). The problem with Shark Night is that it takes itself seriously, and with it's plot how can you? I believe that is the only thing that actually makes this film humorous. But honestly if you have no respect for "B" movies just avoid this one. If you are looking for something just as brainless but done right, go out and rent or buy Piranha (the 1978 original or the 2010 remake) they're both campy fun! But if you're looking for a fun shark movie, I always liked Deep Blue Sea, than of course their is Jaws and its campy successors.

George Miller's The Road Warrior (a.k.a Mad Max 2), is without a doubt a great action packed thrill ride, with moments that will have you on the edge of your seat, and cheering for Max (Mel Gibson) to kick some @ss.

The scenes without dialogue are strong, and prove that sometimes in a film less is more, or as the expression goes actions speak louder than words.

The plot implicates Max who attempts to help a large group of people who live in a fortified oil refinery, escape with the remaining oil. This oil is wanted by a vicious gang of motorcyclists, who will stop at nothing to get what they want.

What also strengthened the movie was its lack of concern to create any subplots that could have potentially been added, such as a love story, etc. The film avoids complicating itself and stays relatively focused to the main plot.

My one complaint is that the film was over too soon, but then again sometimes less is more.

****1\2 Stars Out Of *****

Unfortunately, you can not even compare John Hughes' comic, and at times rather touching, 1987 film "Planes, Trains,& Automobiles" to Todd Phillips' "Due Date". Not that the two should really be compared, but in watching this film you can't help but reflect on "Planes, Trains, & Automobiles" and a certain nostalgia for great films of past decades.

Although "Due Date" borrows particular elements from John Hughes' film, it is not in any way a re-imagining or remake of this earlier film.

"Due Date" follows the story of two strangers who are flying out of Georgia, and incidentally happen to be stuck together for better or worse once they are put on the "no fly list". What follows is a series of misadventures that occur along the way to their destination Los Angeles.

Robert Downey Jr. plays Peter Highman, an ill tempered business man who is on his way home to make the date of his wife's delivery. Although you would like to like Downey's character from the beginning, he is mostly unlikeable for the first half of the movie because of the way he treats people as he appears to come off as pompous. I must add that for someone who is excited to be a new parent, his character seemed rather reluctant to watch Heidi's (Juliette Lewis) two children. Being constantly irritated by her son, Peter lashes out on the boy with a punch to the gut, followed by a threat not to tell Heidi about the incident before he leaves. Although I may have let out a mild chuckle at both scenes, I would have possibly chuckled even more if it weren't for the fact that this man is going to be a father. For this reason these moments lost some its humour as it made me question Peter's qualifications as a parent.

We then have Ethan Tremblay played by Zach Galifianakis. This character we would like to feel sympathy for but most of the time his character appears heartless and "pathological" as Peter puts it. Two scenes in particular that shed light on these two claims is when Peter decides to let his guard down and confide in Ethan a traumatic event from his childhood "the abandonment of his father" to which Ethan laughs and says a comical remark. The other, is Ethan's need to commit an "immoral act" (for lack of a better word) before sleeping right in front of Peter.

Mostly the film relies on extreme actions from the characters, that are at times a bit shocking, for humour. The film also tries to include a touching story about death and letting go. But it is not conveyed thoroughly enough to have an emotional impact. The film also uses the death of Ethan's father as a gag once they all begin to drink his ashes, that are mistaken for coffee grounds. Once we do begin to laugh we almost immediately shift over into feeling guilty for laughing when we see the emotional impact it has on Ethan. For this reason I feel that there was not a well balanced medium that blended in both the successful amount of humour in with the right amount of sad notes. Something John Hughes did successfully in "Planes, Trains, & Automobiles". It just seemed too sporadic in "Due Date".

Overall the film has its moments of humour and the film as a whole is at best enjoyable but nevertheless mindless. But I would recommend John Hughes' "Planes, Trains, & Automobiles" before recommending "Due Date".

** Stars Out Of *****

Danny Cannon direct's "I Still Know What You Did Last Summer", a film that is senseless and unnecessary to have been made. The film attempts to come off as a decent sequel with a storyline which I believe was intended to be clever, but the film seems rather out of place and slightly offbeat from its successor. Jim Gillespie's "I Know What You Did Last Summer" was a different breed of horror genre basing it more on suspense, instead of the typical horror movie elements which deals with sex, drugs, and excessive gore. Moreso with a screenplay by "Scream" screenwriter Kevin Williamson, it couldn't go wrong. However Trey Callaway's screenplay for this predecessor has made the mood and setting in this film entirely different. Disregarding the style of the first film. Having said that there is still an entertainment value, as the film does have its moments of humour, cringing brutality, with a few cheap scares. But with no great or memorable chase scene and or well developed characters like in "I Know What You Did Last Summer", the film is just a below average sequel and cash-in on the success of the first film. *1/2 Stars Out of ****

I seldomly bash films, and usually I am able to find enjoyment in any film I watch. But this film was plain and simple garbage! There are no other words to describe it. This poor quality film and ridiculous concept which is so far out there its ludicrous. Genetically altered fish that not only have the ability to fly, but to breathe out of water. They're also pretty smart with good vision too, because they know where the people are at and almost never miss their target. To say a sequel to Joe Dante's 1978 cult classic film 'Piranha' would have potential, is probably wrong to say. The first film was a classic, with humour and unnerving moments which actually make you ask the question "What lies under the water?" Dante was able to create fear of the unknown in his film, and although many if not most films bend the branches of reality, Cameron's Piranha II: The Spawning completely mangles and breaks those branches which attempts to form any type of realism. A personal opinion is only a personal opinion, and if you still decide to waste your money on this film that is your choice. Maybe you'll find some enjoyment in this film that I could not, and if so kudos to you because you have a greater tolerance for films then I do. 0 Stars Out of ****

Friday the 13th Part VII: The New Blood, is nothing original but nonetheless clever. The idea of having Jason Vorhees(the supernatural evil entity) and Tina Shepard (the gifted telekinetic) battling against each other on a pretty even playing field is a really good concept. However having said that, a good concept doesn't necessarily make this film a strong entry in the franchise. The film did not seem to have a storyline which matched up with the ending of part 6, even though there is some stock footage at the beginning. Camp Crystal Lake is nowhere to be seen, and how Jason ended up in front of Tina's family cottage while chained to a boulder is illogical. Also there is a lack of reason with Dr. Crews, Tina's psychiatrist, intentions and motivations. The escalating climatic battle between both Jason and Tina was good, but more of Tina's abilities should have been used and the battle should have been much more creative and slightly prolonged. Unfortunately the climatic ending was a great disappointment, and it seems as though the writers just thought of the easiest and most predictable ending to go to. The biggest question I have for this ending is, "What was Tina's dad still doing at the bottom of the lake, after 10 years?"--> "Tina and Amanda you've got some explaining to do."

-MovieCritic33-6

Viewing James Cameron's film today (I was six when I first saw this film) I have mixed emotions about it. When you look at it from an entertainment point of view, the film fits the bill perfectly and offers both a substantial love story for the girls, and a great build up of action for the guys that occurs around the last hour or so of the film.

I also give credit where credit is due, I do believe it does have a good "fictional" storyline full of emotion, and Cameron intertwined the factual characters in the story rather nicely. Also the sets are incredible, replicating Titanic almost to a "T". The special effects were also incredibly well done, and at times quite astounding. Cameron also does a fairly good job at recreating the atmosphere of that night, with an excellent score to back it up composed by the very talented James Horner.

From a critical point of view, from someone who is quite obsessed with the subject, the film is a tad unoriginal. Not because I've seen this story done before, but because certain story elements just are. For one, the story itself is a standard Hollywood formula, possibly too Hollywood for my liking. Repeating the tale of star crossed lovers/two people who can never be together because they are from different worlds. Two, because it channels both the 1943 Nazi propaganda film "Titanic", and the 1960 MGM film "The Last Voyage". Maybe it was coincidental, but nevertheless it seems to be a re-imagining.

In the 1943 version Henry must go back down to steerage to find his brother Bobby who was arrested and imprisoned in a cell. As the hallway continues to flood Henry finds an axe to break down the cell door.

In "The Last Voyage" Cliff Henderson and Hank Lawson are in the dining room as she begins to flood with water.

I guess nowadays many film ideas are are recycled, but at the same time some credit should be given to both these films.

On another note entirely, James Horner's score is quite possibly what makes this film so emotional, unfortunately I feel that too much of this film rides on the coat tail of the love story and the music score. What should be the main focus (the story of the actual passengers and crew) is too overshadowed by the love story; you may want to ask yourself "what is really moving me to tears?" Take away the music and much of the emotional impact is gone, as it is with most films. Personally I believe a film should be able to stand on its own by impacting the viewer without the accompaniment of music. Don't get me wrong I love a good score, but the film should not have to rely on it like a crutch, which I feel at times the film does.

The love story takes away also, as it too overshadows the factual passengers and crew. At times you get so caught up in the fictional storyline that you forget about the true story. Again the film should have been able to have stood on its own without the love story, but it acts as a major crutch. I know it was not their intentions to overshadow the true story, but nevertheless it happened unintentionally.

However, there are some very emotional scenes when James Cameron does his tracking shots, as you see all of the passengers running towards the stern, and jumping off the decks of the ship. Cameron does this successfully and makes the viewer put themselves in a position to imagine what it must have been like for all of those people, and what it would have been like to be on that ship yourself during the Titanic's final moments.

Aside from that, I must point out that the last song the band played on the ship is debatable, some claim it was "Nearer my God to Thee", while others claim it was a waltz known for short as "Autumn". No matter what the final song was, the fact that James Cameron played the Bethany version of this hymn, is inaccurate. Cameron possibly used this because of how recognized this version is, but if you are going to tell a true story I believe you should tell it accurately. If anything the Horbury version of this hymn would have been played as depicted in the film "A Night to Remember", as an eye witness vividly remembers this version being played sometime that night. Otherwise it would have been the Propior Deo version of the hymn.

Lastly, the final two things I have to mention. One is the portrayal of First Officer William Murdoch, he did not commit suicide as he was spotted in the water by wireless operator Harold Bride. Two the "Break Up" of the Titanic is a question of debate, as new evidence and theories are arising which would contradict the portrayal of the break- up in the film.

In my final thoughts, it's hard to bring a true story to the big screen without having a fictional story to support it, because let's face it, for some the love story is the only thing that interests them. When in all actuality this story has so much to offer without the use of fiction. Titanic was a ship so technologically advanced for it's time, so big and powerful that man believed that they were victorious, dominant, and on top of the world. However one night changed the fate of the world forever, the tragic true story of the Titanic and its passenger and crew will forever be a story of morals, including the ignorance of man.

James Cameron's film "Titanic" is still a great motion picture aside from it's flaws. It may be overrated but you be the judge.

"Prom Night" is one of the horror films that is highly underrated. What this film has that most horror films from the 80's generation (including some from these past two generations) do not take the time to develop is a strong plot with good character development. Of course these come with good screen writing.

Having said that, as a consequence the viewer actually has to sit through a building story, which takes a while to build up.

Therefore about 50 minutes of the film is dedicated solely to that. But that's not to say there aren't any moments of suspense or slight uneasiness. But during the prom sequence the film has a tendency to lose track of the fact that it is a horror film, and so there may come a time during the film that you'll ask yourself "what is it I'm watching again?"

There are a few possibilities as to who could be doing the killings and why, but the revelation was a bit predictable and if you pay close attention to the film there are actually intentional hints dropped. This I found to be quite clever. Also, most horror movies don't leave the audience on a sad not but this one actually did, something rare to find in a horror film, and it was nice to see.

Those who are expecting a horror film with excessive gore scenes will not find it in this horror film. For Paul Lynch's "Prom Night" it is mostly what you do not see that makes you cringe.

"Prom Night" runs approximately 89 minutes in length, and should at least be considered as a rental. "Prom Night" is not a forgettable horror movie, and has memorable moments. Roughly 39 minutes of the film will keep you on edge and entertained, especially during Kelly's chase scene. Whilst the other 50 minutes will keep you for the most part intrigued. ***1/2 Stars Out of *****

Wes Craven's "A Nightmare On Elm Street" is undoubtedly a classic for the horror genre that will haunt the minds of its audience members for a long time.

Although it may not haunt the minds of many viewers today, back in 1984 this movie scared a lot of its viewing audience. Today many of us look at horror movies from that decade as "cheesy", over analyzing technical elements, the acting, and the plot. Most of us still over analyze films to this day, but keep in mind that this is only a movie, whose main purpose is to entertain its audience. Which I believe Wes Craven's film achieves its purpose.

The film overall was great with a clever concept and a simple, but eerie storyline. I had no problem with the acting in this film, or the dialogue which to me came across as passable to very believable.

I felt that John Saxon (Lt. Thompson), Heather Langenkamp (Nancy Thompson), Amanda Wyss (Tina Gray), and Johnny Depp (Glen Lantz)all delivered solid and convincing performances. Jsu Garcia (Rod Lane) delivered a mediocre to a little above mediocre performance in my opinion, lacking emotional depth and intensity in some scenes. Although with all due respect to Jsu Garcia, he didn't have a lot of scene time to develop his character and make him more three dimensional. Ronee Blakley (Marge Thompson) was convincing in her role as the over protective and overbearing, alcoholic, smoke inducing mother who made me chuckle a couple of times. The rest of the supporting cast does a good job with what they are given.

As far as special effects and stunts go, sure there are a few goof ups where you can clearly notice what isn't meant to be noticed by viewers, but to me the effect is still there.

I thought the climax was great and escalated nicely from the beginning of the film right up until the end. My only complaint with this film is the final scene of this film, which is entirely left ambiguous, only for sequels to try and explain what happened after.

Unfortunately Wes Craven's original ending was scrapped because it wasn't deemed fit for the film. The original ending would also have made it hard for a sequel to come into play...even though Wes Craven had a concept for a sequel which was rejected and was later used for the storyline of Wes Craven's "New Nightmare". Although the ending might have been a huge let down for some audience members, as the director would have chosen the "it was all just a dream" technique, to me it would have been far more superior and would have been looked at as more than just a horror movie. Mainly because the concept of someone creating a "monster" in their own dream is clever, and the idea that she has to conquer the "monster" that she created in order for her to wake up from her dream is also an interesting concept. Also, having the car simply driving away with the children skipping to the jump rope song would have been highly effective, because it would have been more of a statement stating that although you may have overcome this bad dream, it is only a matter of time before you have your next nightmare, and that you will never be able to actually get rid of bad dreams. To me this is a lot creepier then the ending they decided to go with.

On another note Nancy's final dialogue with "Freddy" makes no sense to the scene that follows, which is why it is entirely left up to the audience to decide whether it is just another one of Nancy's dreams, or her mother's dream. Either way the film finished on a weaker note because of it.

Even though the ending is entirely ambiguous, and somewhat confusing, I feel that if they had gone with the original ending people would still have been scratching their heads as Nancy would have had so many "dream within a dream" sequences. Therefore in the end result it doesn't really matter because someone will still be scratching their head by the end credits.

Overall Wes Craven's "A Nightmare On Elm Street" is a great horror movie that should be regarded as mindless entertainment, sure to haunt your memories and give you nightmares for years to come. But if not the film itself, the music score will be sure get under your skin.

****1/2 Stars Out Of *****

Wes Craven's "New Nightmare" is the best out of all the "Nightmare" movies, although a part of me feels that it shouldn't be classified as being part of the "Nightmare" instalments, because the film has nothing to do with the premise of the other six instalments for the most part, and it's also much more of a suspense film than a horror movie.

For this movie, Wes Craven decided to have his plot go in an entirely new direction.

Wes Craven's "New Nightmare" revolves around the fictional life of Heather Langenkamp who portrayed "Nancy" in two of the "Nightmare" films. Heather Langenkamp has been having nightmares of her fictional character's nemesis "Freddy Krueger", and has also been receiving phone calls and mail from an unknown assailant. Later on in the plot it is discovered that Wes Craven has been working on a "New Nightmare" script that has already been put into production by the producers over at "New Line". But what was thought to have only been a script has now turned into something even darker. An evil spirit has taken the character of Freddy, and is trying to get into the real world. Although to successfully do this, the spirit or "Freddy" must defeat and overcome the one who first gave him all of his power ten years ago, Heather Langenkamp or "Nancy". But the big question is, is she willing to play "Nancy" one last time, and is she ready for what lies ahead? The premise of the story is well explained for the most part with only minor details that are left ambiguous to the viewers. However it's best not to over think the story too much, especially when it comes to movies of this genre, and simply go with it.

Fans of Robert Englund might be disappointed that he has very little to do with the plot of this film, even though he plays himself and "Freddy" it is technically NOT him, but an evil entity of some sort who also only makes a full appearance towards the final half of the movie. Wes Craven made a clever decision to only have "Freddy" truly appear towards the end of the movie, because the whole time you're sitting there waiting for him to make an appearance, and because you know it's going to happen but not when it will happen creates a build up of suspense for the viewer. This also gives for a greater climax moment. That being said, Robert Englund delivers his best and scariest performance as "the man with the claws", and his appearance is sure to scare you in this one.

As for Heather Langenkamp, she delivers a top-notch performance as both "herself" and "Nancy", and is also a thrill to watch in this film.

Miko Hughes who plays Langenkamp's fictional son "Dylan Porter" does a great job at acting "creepy" and is very believable in his role.

John Saxon who plays both himself and Nancy's father "Lt. Donald Thompson" also delivers a great performance.

Overall for acting all of the characters, primary and secondary, held their own and gave solid performances.

I thoroughly enjoyed this movie. Wes Craven has to be one of the most creative and talented directors/screenwriters of the horror and thriller/suspense genre.

Wes Craven's "New Nightmare" cleverly incorporates elements from the first film that were retained in everyone's memory, such as the "tongue in the phone" and Tina's death scene, to name a few of the more apparent ones. Fans of the original "A Nightmare On Elm Street" are in for some scares as well as some big time shivers as the clock counts down for "Nancy" and "Freddy's" face-off that is unravelling rapidly to one last climatic showdown.

A buy for most, and simply a rent for the rest pending on their preference of film.

***** Stars Out Of *****

With Jim Gillespie's direction and Kevin Williamson's screenplay, "I Know What You Did Last Summer" proves to be a successful piece of work that utilized with style. With a cast of talented actors: Jennifer Love Hewitt, Freddie Prinze Jr., Sarah Michelle Gellar, Ryan Phillippe, and Anne Heche. The idea of mixing an urban legend in with the story of four high school graduates who are keeping a secret of a fatal accident they were involved in (loosely based on Lois Duncan's novella of the same name)is an idea that is both good and clever. The film mostly avoids typical horror films which just revolve around sex, drugs, and excessive gore. It does however include one of the best chase scenes ever to be filmed in a horror movie. Although the main idea is not original and has been used as the plot for other horror films such as "Prom Night", it still works. Fun, entertaining, and suspenseful "I Know What You Did Last Summer" is yet another film of this genre that slides under viewers radars. ***1\2 Stars Out of *****

Elia Kazan's film adaptation to Tennessee Williams' Pulitzer Prize Play "A Streetcar Named Desire", is a very dark movie about a woman named Blanche DuBois (Vivien Leigh) who flees to New Orleans to see her sister Stella (Kim Hunter) who lives there with her husband Stanley Kowalski (Marlon Brando).

The reason this film was such a milestone for cinema was because of its dark themes dealing with serious issues, and disheartening facts of life. However because of its dark nature scenes of the film were edited upon its release to the theatres in order to meet certain censorship standards of that time. Therefore if you're thinking of purchasing or simply renting this film, be sure to get the "Original Director's Cut Version" of the film for the full impact.

Vivien Leigh who is possibly best known for her role as "Scarlett O'Hara" in "Gone With the Wind" is nothing less then spectacular offering a performance that will disturb you as well as sympathize for her.

(On a side note it would have been interesting, as well as nice to see Jessica Tandy, who played the original Blanche DuBois on Broadway alongside "Hunter" and "Brando", reprise her role in the film adaptation of "A Streetcar..." as "Hunter" and "Brando" did.) Kim Hunter, very well known for her performance as "Zira" in "Planet of the Apes" is incredibly terrific in her role as "Stella" and compliments both "Leigh" and "Brando" very well as a co-star.

Marlon Brando...well you all know he's famous for his roles in a lot of movies, including "The Godfather" as "Vito Corleone" and "Superman The Movie" as "Jor-El". Marlon Brando does an amazing job as being a real jackass throughout the whole film and really makes you hate/disgust him by the end credits.

In a final reflection, I personally found the film adaptation to be better then the play itself. However it's because the ending of the film leaves it less ambiguous then the play does.

Although the plot is dark and depressing, "A Streetcar Named Desire" is a great story that becomes more and more intriguing as the plot unfolds. Loyalties will be questioned, and honesty will be tested in this stellar "A-List" cast ensemble of the psychological drama "A Streetcar Named Desire".