Reviews

30 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
1/10
Brilliant, brave, original, engaging, deep, and beautiful...
9 January 2017
Warning: Spoilers
...are all words that can never be used to describe this film.

This movie lacks any of the qualities of a good film, but does contain several qualities of a bad hooker- cheap, lazy, covered in make up, desperate for money, and on the whole rather tragic.

There is nothing exciting about this film. It literally repeats as much from the original film as possible, right down to actually remaking some of the exact same shots and sequences! The plot too is almost exactly the same as the first film, except there is an incredibly facile and over-used deus ex machina that swoops in and saves the day in the end.

The characters are 90% cliché and the rest is just hinged on a prayer that the actor's good looks will make you like them enough to keep watching as they spout off redundant and tortured Hollywood tropes with agonising frequency.

But, for me, this was not the worst part. The worst part was the utterly inappropriate injection of Hollywood's political opinions into the plot, in the following ways:

1. The president sounds suspiciously like Hillary Clinton.

2. There are female characters that exist seemingly just to fill a quota of female actors as they offer absolutely nothing to the plot.

3. The US army is made up of a rainbow of colours and creeds to reflect the fact that in the Utopian future (under Hillary Clinton) there is true equality!

Hilariously, however, for all of its condescending politicising, it STILL somehow manages to be incredibly racist! The African allies are depicted as a kind of 'hooga-booga!' screaming primitive tribe, who despite possessing alien technology in a supposedly unified world, still carry machetes and have a sort of 'animal' understanding of the aliens.

And it also makes a subtle but incredibly insulting jab at Jews too- for when the aliens are about to slaughter our imitation Hillary, she bravely declares 'there will be no peace', which is of course a reference to the rhetoric of Palestine towards Israeli settlement-building. And with that single sentence therefore strongly implies that the monstrous aliens who want to steal the earth basically equate to Israeli Jews. Which is as offensive as it is ignorant.

Personally I'm very tired of Hollywood's insipid narcissism in thinking it can lecture everyone on moral absolutism because it has money. I wish Emmerich had put more effort into making a half-decent film and less effort into trying to offer the public a cheap blow-job of a movie in return for cash.

It says what it thinks you want to hear, shows you what it thinks you want to see, and yet somehow this film manages to be the exact opposite of appealing.
4 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Highly Original and Exquisitely Filmed
10 May 2016
This a modern vampire film that manages to create some excellent re- inventions of the Vampire genre while retaining its core elements. From the start the directors use of framing, tempo and scene- construction are simply brilliant. As well as this the cinematography is sometimes breath-taking.

There are several scenes which are wonderfully creative revisions of some classic vampire tropes, and the whole film has a sensitivity and aesthetic beauty of the kind rarely seen in modern film. The use of music, silence and movement gel perfectly to create something surreal, sexy and un-nerving.

It's a carefully constructed mix of film-noir, romance, horror and drama that comes out as some new kind of delightfully intoxicating cocktail. Not only this but Amirpour's screen-play and scripting are also excellent, making her a serious contender for directorial nobility in my opinion.

The one and only down side I found was in regards to the plot, which veered a little too far towards a kind of childish moralising on 'toxic masculinity' somewhat devoid of tact and subtext. Despite its masterful execution I felt the overall narrative could have been much more than the simplistic parable which it turned out to be.

On the whole, however, one of the best films of 2016.
0 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
41 (I) (2012)
4/10
Not Great But Not Terrible
2 May 2016
This is an amateur film and parts of it are good, but for the most part it is still very amateur. Perhaps the best aspect is the directing and editing, which are probably good enough for mainstream film, but nothing amazing. The editing was well done, but again, fairly standard. Like any amateur film the acting ranges from reasonable to bad, but that's not exactly the directors fault given the limited budget.

By far the biggest problem is the script which at times is quite poor, most noticeably when attempting to pose deep, metaphysical questions. At times I could hear the voice of the director speaking through his actors, and this sounded inept. In amateur film the scripting and plot are perhaps the only things not really held back by a restricted budget, and unfortunately neither aspect was that good. The film failed to evolve a coherent sense of empathy for the main protagonist, it feigned emotion more than produced any and nothing ever really became that interesting or exciting. Some characters, most noticeably the cops, were little more than 2-bit cliché's, and there were quite a few moments which were unnecessary, melodramatic and time-wasting.

Having said that it's not unwatchable and as amateur film goes it's probably one of the better ones. But the director, in my opinion, is not ready to make feature length titles and needs to develop his abilities further, especially his screen-writing and scripting if he wants to write his own material. On the positive, however, I have seen Hollywood films that annoyed me far more and that's saying something.
33 out of 46 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Fact Versus Fiction
21 April 2016
This documentary series is useful in one respect. It shows how a highly arbitrary personal opinion can be transformed into a pseudo-academic study of a social issue, and presented as if it were a fact. Never before have I seen such obviously personal bias presented under the guise of an objective observation.

The problem with the series, apart from it having absolutely no directorial or artistic merit whatsoever, is that it bends so far toward the spectrum of ideological brainwashing that it is actually quite disturbing. A quick search of the series on the web also gives more reason for concern as it would appear, despite its pitifully poor critical reception, that most reviews are positive in the extreme. This further lends the series an air of Orwellian cultism which I personally find very creepy.

And let's not pretend that the subject matter was controversial or brave in any way. So far as the political stance on gaming goes Sarkeesian is in safe water, repeating (perhaps even fuelling) the fashionable opinion that video-games are not only misogynistic but that they also incite violence in those who play them. Of course the actual scientific research seems to support the opposite conclusion, as most psychological studies of human behaviour take into account personal psychological issues which for the most part are developmental in origin and thus not much effected by things such as gaming.

This form of popular (and it seems to me rather dysfunctional) feminist research assumes that all human behaviour is caused by social influences. Obviously this tends more toward a political philosophy akin to Marxism, and to that extent this documentary is more like a 30's propaganda video than an actual research based study.

Weird, wacky and altogether unworthy of the documentary genre.
14 out of 19 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Queen of Drivel
28 February 2016
What a massive disappointment from Herzog. Before this I was a huge Herzog fan, which is why this film is such a bizarre shock. It was as though Werner Herzog had suddenly become a pupil of Josh Boone, which is like Mozart taking lessons from Justin Bieber. Is this some kind of joke?

Sadly not. This is an over long, melodramatic, corny idealisation of an aristocratic woman who, having no real responsibilities in life, decides to use her vast wealth to embark on a life long holiday across the desert, because really what else is she do with her time?

Throughout the film the main character is idealised, swooned over, worshipped and deferred to. Why? Not because she belongs to the most privileged and powerful class of women on the planet, but because she has a courageous heart and a deep, enigmatic understanding of Arabs.

At the end we have some childish moralising about the injustice of the British empire, aptly spoken from one aristocrat to another (without a lick of irony) and then the 'Queen' of the upper classes rides off into the desert to be immortalised as a female idol for generations to come. Not that she actually did anything to help anyone whatsoever.

Poorly acted, poorly written, poorly conceptualised and thoroughly boring.
96 out of 135 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Macbeth (I) (2015)
10/10
A New Cinematic Classic
27 January 2016
Firstly we need to consider the sheer bravery of attempting to translate a classical adaptation of Shakespeare onto the screen with such close adherence to the original script. We also then need to understand that in an industry where Fast and Furious sets the standard for popularity, this film took a huge risk.

And what a fantastic job it did indeed. The director exhibits an excellent understanding of Shakespeare's verse. This creative analysis of the script enabled a couple of new interpretations of some classic scenes which come off as both modern and devastatingly poignant as a result.

The magnificently psychological subtext of Macbeth is also elaborated with skill and intellectual sensitivity. Certain choices of plot emphasis, the rearrangement of the chronological order of some verses and the angle of approach to the many linguistic metaphors was in every instance warranted and successful. The director was brave enough to take new and original turns in the adaptation and yet was never tempted to do something drastic for the sake of it. Ultimately this is very high quality.

This film cannot be judged by whether or not you understand what's happening. The director tries to assist the audience as much as possible, with the help of excellent acting, but nothing is spoon- fed. If you have no understanding of Shakespearian verse or drama then you may not be able to access this film as much as you'd like. It's definitely not for everyone, nor was it intended to be.

Surely a classic of film making.
2 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Furious 7 (2015)
1/10
Oh...My...God!
21 January 2016
Seeing this movie means that I will now have to go back and change the only film that I ever rated 1 star previously and give it a 10, because literally this film is so absolutely god-awful that it makes the worst movie I have ever seen previously look like pure gold.

Let me be frank, this is not a movie. It's a cartoon with real actors. I understand this is not supposed to be realistic of course, but on no level at all can this be considered good. I mean it looks like it's been written by a sexually frustrated 13 year old boy who only eats sugar.

The plot is so illogically ridiculous, so full of holes and nonsensical developments that it makes my three old niece sound like an astrophysicist. The action sequences are all totally pointless because in the end none of the good guys are ever in any danger whatsoever and I would not have been surprised even if Vin Diesel had taken a direct hit to the face with a nuclear missile and still walked away with a Hollywood smile. What's the point?

Asides from the absolutely appalling plot, narrative, acting, the cringingly immature script, the awkwardly grotesque directing and the inane and utterly boring repetition, the 'film' manages to fill the moments in between explosions with shots of scantily clothed females lounging around super cars. Which just proves my theory that James Wan and Chris Morgan got the inspiration for this flick while they where snorting cocaine off a prostitute's butt, in a bed made of thousand dollar bills, while playing GTAV.

But in the end I can't blame the creators of this junk-food film, because judging by the hundreds upon hundreds of millions of dollars it made they are actually making the kind of movie people love. Which, in the words of Alejandro G. Iñárritu, goes to show that, "Popularity is the slutty little cousin of prestige."

But if you do love this film then thats fine of course. As long you're 15 and under and you really don't know the difference between a film and a cheeseburger.

Awful.
15 out of 78 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Sabotage (2014)
1/10
An Action Movie that Manages to be Political
14 January 2016
Yes, it is a very political movie. It presents the point of view that the militarisation of the US Police force is not something to be questioned, but to be celebrated and sensationalised. After all, in this film the cops need the light armoured personnel carriers, the assault rifles, the full camouflage ballistic body armour and of course the tactics of urban warfare because they are fighting foreign drug cartels armed with 50 calibre machine guns for goodness sake! Not US citizens.

The fact of the matter is that giving this kind of impression to the public trivialises and undermines a very serious current debate about what kind of role are we asking our Police to perform? I.e. should they think of themselves as soldiers fighting an actual war on crime in the heart of America, or should they think of themselves as peace keepers who serve the public interest and keep people safe? It wouldn't take a huge leap of the imagination to guess that Arnold is totally behind the idea of Police as warriors. And I'm sure he is as eager as the rest of us to see the cops use all their cool battlefield gear. The trouble is that it may just encourage that military hardware to be more frequently deployed against normal citizens in the US as the public become desensitised to it and certainly goes a long way to making it appear not only normal, but cool.

The worst kind of mindless and irresponsible crap to come out of Hollywood in recent years. Only watch if you want an example of the way in which the media is used as a propaganda tool to push the political opinions of lobby groups and right wing financiers.
5 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Womb (2010)
9/10
Brave and Brilliant (and a must for anyone interested in psychoanalysis!)
12 January 2016
What we have here is nothing short of film-making at its best. The subject line alone is incredibly brave and the numerous psychological and philosophical nuances are brought to the fore with masterful subtlety and skill.

The film revolves around a woman who has lost her lover in a tragic accident. Driven by grief and guilt she decides to give birth to his clone, eventually leading to all kinds of complications.

The film runs on so many levels. At its most superficial it's about incest sure, but more so it's about the difficulty of coping with grief and lost love objects, it's a figurative examination of the Freudian Oedipus Complex and also a look at identity, sacrifice and love. In this much the film is like a poem, richly metaphorical and deeply personal, able to be interpreted in many ways.

The director's use of imagery, graphic matches and attendance to the script's subtext is simply excellent. Throughout the plot there are at least three times when the protagonists are thrown into a 'different planet' from a psychological perspective. It begins with a snail on a table, then with a child's imagination about his origins and again with the final epiphany. All these instances are subtle enough to work purely subconsciously, but the viewer will also enjoy discovering these revolutions of meaning visually.

The only thing that I felt could have been done better was Matt Smith's characterisation of Thomas. Although I'm sure he wanted to portray a very emotional and child-like character somehow he comes off as having a learning difficulty, which is slightly disappointing. I felt he could have been far more intellectually present whilst retaining his emotional sensitivity without coming across as 'simple' if a different interpretation had been made. That said, he certainly does enough for us to empathise with the character and does manage to maintain integrity throughout.

In the end this film is bold because of course it was never going to popular, just as Freud's theories on sexuality were never popular, and that earns everyone who made and produced this film a special kind of respect.
6 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Visual Poetry
11 January 2016
If you are into aesthetic metaphor in the moving image than this film is well worth viewing. The director constructs a kind of guided meditation through the use of poetic narration and symbolic imagery.

The film is narrated by a man of whom it would appear has suffered some kind of crises and has thus gone to live a spiritual life among nature. The metaphor and beautiful symbolism both in word and image succeed however in making this an archetypal journey of spiritual growth.

The director clearly has a keen and exquisite sense of aesthetic beauty, and the film is edited very well, the combination of which I felt thoroughly worked to accomplish not only a beautiful but a relevant and meaningful experience for the viewer.

There were however a few moments where I felt certain elements had been over-stressed and sometimes this felt a little laboured. For example there is a slight over-reliance on dancing, as if the director was afraid to let the beauty of stillness occupy the screen. This sometimes results in an unnecessarily 'noisy' image. At times also the dancing appeared a little ambiguous and confused, and this I feel was a mistake caused by what seems like a loss of focus towards the end.

That said however, the film is overall extremely good and I found it very moving at times. It is visual poetry and truly a work of art.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Pretentious Plastic Palm Trees
10 January 2016
If you narrate...your movie...using whispers...in short...sentences...it will make it seem...meaningful...

..only it wasn't. From start to finish this film is nothing more than stylised cliché. If you've seen the first 5 minutes then there is absolutely no need to watch the rest, because nothing else happens.

In short the film is as follows: Playful nymphets frolicking around in luxurious spaces, Christian Bale looking like he's had too much lithium, various narrators whispering something about life and some melodramatic improv. acting all filmed with a shaky camera. That's it. No meaning, no message and certainly no depth.

From the style of the film it's safe to say that the director is aiming at depicting a characters search for meaning in a superficial world of carnal desire and material illusion. Unfortunately though, far from creating some kind of Zen reflection, the film itself remains as superficial as the characters it portrays. The direction is a bag of tricks with the same series of shots repeated over and over and the narration is all pseudo-poetic garbage delivered in whispers so it seems deep.

This is all actually very surprising, because this same director also made 'The Tree of Life' which was similar in style to this film but actually had a purpose and urgency to it. In comparison this really does seem suspiciously like a very lazy imitation of his earlier work.

Spiritually this film is about as important as a Levi jeans advert and artistically it's as beautiful as a plastic palm tree. There's literally no reason to watch this film, it's simply the product of Malick's ego masturbation brought to orgasm with the help of some Hollywood A-Listers in the hope everyone would come off looking like celebrity Buddhists. Instead they just look like fakers.

Take my advice, don't waste your time and money on this pretentious nonsense, go and watch The Tree of Life instead.
113 out of 184 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
A New Kind of Bad
2 January 2016
Warning: Spoilers
You've heard about those old 'snake oil' salesmen in the Old West right? Well it seems one of them decided to make a movie. And much like the garbage bottles of ointments and tonics those old con-men made a living from, this movie too is at best worthless and at worst harmful.

The movie begins by vigorously stating that the whole thing is based on actual events and real archive footage. The only problem is that very quickly it appears that the so called 'real' footage is somehow not quite right. It kind of hits you in increments... First these poor alien victims seem to be acting up. Then there's all the make-up they seem to be wearing. Then there's the edited camera angles during their interviews. Then there's the over the top captioning to the effect of 'this footage is really real', even down to the point when someone is screaming it reads...'screams'. And then finally there's the police cam footage of some local lunatic killing his family and then blowing his brains out and suddenly it becomes painfully obvious... it's all lies.

Frankly I was relieved that the efforts of the editor and director in faking all this footage had been so woefully poor. I was glad I didn't live in a world where hysterical and obviously disturbed individuals are further harmed by well meaning but totally incompetent therapists (I know, don't say it!). But after this came the anger at the realisation that once you glean, as you quickly will, that it's all a load of smoke and mirrors the movie is not good enough anymore to actually stand on its own feet. It seems it was solely dependent on the audience's believing in it for any of its appeal. Without that it's just all melodramatic screaming, nonsense scripting and cliché madness.

But it's worse than that, it's irresponsible. Without getting personal, any rational individual will understand that alien abduction is about as likely as a duck quacking the complete works of Shakespeare in Morse code. (No really, there are statistical analyses of the probability of alien abduction and let's just say it's a number with so many zeros you can't fit them on a calculator). So it's safe to say that people who actually do believe that they've been abducted or visited by aliens are probably in need of emotional help or else suffering from the terrifying and unfortunate symptoms of sleep paralysis. So what effect is this kind of trickery going to have on them?

Perhaps the director thought this would be a more radical version of the Blair Witch project? Only the problem is, whereas few people are traumatised by a real life belief in having been attacked by an undead witch in the forest, many people actually do believe in aliens and some of those people are clearly unstable.

By consequence of its shameless fraudulence this movie thus has some explaining to do to the young and impressionable, those who don't have a firm grip on reality and those who are in need of therapy. And also to everyone else who watches it, because movies should be good enough to be entertaining without having to rely on manipulation and lies damn it!
4 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Happy. Sad. Funny. Sad. Happy again... Can I have 5 million dollars now?
4 November 2015
I imagine those were the words the director used to describe what kind of movie he wanted to make to his producers.

I know this is a film for teenagers, but the problem is its just so annoying.

The story centres on the lives of one white middle class American family and their first world problems in a rose tinted two dimensional universe. It claims to be a coming of age story, based on love, but in reality its a slightly histrionic adolescent fantasy. Which is actually a regular formula for this director, in fact I may just as well cut and paste this review onto everything else he's done and probably will do (tho I think this is where I get off).

As a film for teenagers it is OK, and I can look past most of the crap. Sometimes its actually funny, but rarely. What really annoyed me however was that the film pretends, and what's worse may even actually believe, that it has some depth of meaning, and that is nothing short of delusional.

Luckily though Boone manages to secure some pretty good actors so the performances are convincing (although the script is not), and his technical ability to actually film is fine, though certainly not interesting.

Now, if I've taken anything from this films pseudo morals and all those charming good looking kids with their fashionable heartbreak and Hollywood smiles, besides irritation, its that you gotta end on a positive note cos life is about living and loving right? So here goes...this movie sucks!
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Partisan (2015)
9/10
Richly Layered
3 November 2015
This film presents a microcosm of a society governed by a strong patriarchy. Ostensibly it's a haven for those who have suffered at the hands of the wider world but, as the movie slowly reveals, the line between the safety of a haven and the exclusion of fascism is hard to draw.

The most common complaint against this film appears to be that it is 'ambiguous'. However, in my opinion, the film is not ambiguous at all, rather it is 'ambivalent', which may have confused some. The film swings between dichotomies - love and aggression, truth and lies, freedom and control etc. Beautifully summed up by a shot in which Gregory carries in one hand bandages and in the other scissors, perhaps also emblematic of the Eagle in the US federal seal (olive branch in one claw, arrows in the other, literally meaning peace and war).

In my view this film presents us with a social philosophy, one which examines how the sins of our past are passed down onto the children of our future. Even with the best intentions the patriarchal harem that 'Gregory' has created, with its goal of protection, relies on his ability to be totally benign which, owing to the vicissitudes of human nature, is impossible. Thus the ideal of fascism becomes a facade behind which repression and hypocrisy reside. The micro-society depicted is a partisan one. However, the true follower of its values himself becomes a partisan and ironically is therefore in transgression of his autocratic ruler.

There are rich visual metaphors throughout which support a fully animated subtext. All elements of this film are superb, including the acting and the directors gradual unravelling of the pervasive ambivalence in relationships is masterful. The message here can be translated both socially and personally and because of that, like many great films before it, it has a multiform impact and can be watched in many ways. It's not quite genius, but it is extremely good.

Personal, relevant and very well made.
34 out of 44 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Childish and Immature
2 November 2015
But not suitable for children so I guess that just leaves the immature.

Unfortunately this little collection of shorts mainly comprises of the same thing on repeat - trick or treaters followed by a large dose of ultra-violence followed by a predictable twist.

Well actually I can't say that's true for all of them because I must admit that I'd seen enough by story three. So if there are any good ones in this anthology then they certainly haven't decided to start with their best foot forward.

I just don't understand what a plot line that might as well have been dreamt up by a 13 year old boy with anger problems has to do with horror? Chuck in some guts hanging out and some eye-balls rolling around on the floor and somehow, someone thinks this is scary.

As a show-reel for aspiring directors I can understand why this movie exists. Short of that though it's utterly pointless.
13 out of 22 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Room 237 (I) (2012)
9/10
Intellectual and Engaging
1 November 2015
And that's what it is, it's an intellectual analysis of a film, so if that doesn't sound interesting to you then you wont like it.

Indeed, it appears many reviewers have totally missed that point. The documentary doesn't spoon feed the audience clear-cut answers, or claim some kind of ultimate meaning, it's simply an observation on a great film which achieves two aims.

1. It opens up our minds to engaging symbolisms and metaphors which are thought provoking and penetrating.

2. It teaches us how to look at films. Literally, it's an exercise in Film Studies.

For these reasons this documentary was never going to be popular. It's just a shame that people have got so used to the fast-food documentary style that a visual seminar, intellectually rich as it is, is so lost on the majority.

That said, I'll give it to you, The Shining, the film to which this movie relates, was actually full of continuity errors and it seems likely that some of the views presented in this documentary make meaningful connections out of nothing. But that in itself is interesting as it shows the human minds need to create cohesion and meaning out of disorder.

The film does not claim objectivity, it's intended to make you think. But beyond this there are certainly some very intriguing views here and I think many of today's directors who churn out meaningless films for millions of dollars (here's looking at you Boone) would do well to learn from this documentary. Both in terms of what a good film is, and also in how to be brave and original in your style, despite the risk of not being popular, just like Rodney Ascher has done here.

If you like participating in your viewing then you may well enjoy this one.
13 out of 22 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
400 Days (2015)
5/10
Outer Limits/Solaris Mashup on the Cheap
1 November 2015
Well, it wasn't terrible, and considering that the budget was obviously limited I was inclined to be slightly more lenient. I did find the plot somewhat entertaining, it reminded me of an episode of the outer limits or the twilight zone. The acting was fairly decent and the scripting was adequate. But there isn't enough here in the way of originality or ingenuity to make it shine.

The director does a pretty good job of pointing the camera. However, I generally think it's a bad idea to directly reference classic films made by genius directors unless your own film is at or near the same quality, because it seems like compensation. So the references to Kubrick through the use of slow tracking shots, deep focusing and a direct dialogue reference to 2001: A Space Odyssey, were unjustified and annoying.

The film develops a story that has no logical explanation, interspersed with continuity errors. But these weren't severe. What was more irritating was that the ending seems intended to create suspense but it's actually just a cliché. Much like the night-vision POV shots towards the end, there was no real reason for it.

The film isn't terrible and it's entertaining enough for casual viewing. But it's far too much an example of someone trying on purpose to create a film thats supposed to be 'mind-boggling' and creepy just for the sake of it, throwing in too many stereotypes in a kind of aping manner.

The psychological break-down of the crew was little more than a lower quality imitation of films such as Solaris and it pretends at subtext, but produces none.

Like I said, I've seen far worse, the director seems fairly competent and the story was bizarre enough to be somewhat interesting. But it's certainly nothing to get excited about.
82 out of 110 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Horsehead (2014)
5/10
All Head and no Body
31 October 2015
Visually this film is at times quite stunning, but beyond that there's not much else to recommend it.

Unfortunately one reviewer had to compare it to Dario Argento's work, which then started a trend. In reality it is only the director of photography that resembled Argento in this film, the actual director had some nice ideas but fails to hold the film together. The comparison with such a brilliant director is nothing short of total nonsense.

The cinematography was the best part of this movie, providing a powerfully attractive opening scene which exquisitely recreates Fuseli's 18th century oil painting, The Nightmare. After this point however the film is gradually let down by weak acting, a poor script and an overall immature plot.

That's unfortunate because it seems this film had potential, taking iconography from sleep paralysis, some interesting ideas provided by Jungian psychology and consistently attractive scene construction. But all of this gets flushed down the pan by a director who seems determined to compromise everything this film could have been with an over reliance on visual effects and music apparently compensating for a lack of any real substance.

This film is the work of a great cinematographer and a director that needs to develop his ability, especially his screen writing.
11 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Nightmare (II) (2015)
10/10
Paralysed with Fear
28 October 2015
The Nightmare is a feature length docu-drama that examines the stories of people who experience chronic 'sleep paralysis', a condition in which one wakes up shortly after falling asleep only to find they can't move and are the subject of terrifying and realistic hallucinations.

With imaginative and stylistically rich direction and composition we are taken on a journey, in the style of the classic tradition of a ghost story, into a realm that seems to blur the boundaries between the horrors of the screen and real life. In this way the film attempts to break down the fourth wall, emulating the way in which for the real life sufferer sleep paralysis destroys the boundaries between nightmares and real life.

The genius of the concept is the fact that the director understands that the most terrifying horror films are those that we can believe on some level are real. By believing that it could happen to us (and the film makes no bones about suggesting it could) we are transported back to our childhood, where ghosts were real and the understanding that 'it's just a story' is of no comfort.

But the film isn't just for thrills. There are indications that the director himself has experienced the condition, and the film succeeds in creating a sense of awareness for this real condition with sympathy, although that sympathy is mainly through scaring the crap out of the audience so we know what it feels like!

There are also extremely interesting analogies drawn between sleep paralysis and the origin of beliefs such as alien abduction, demon possession and the notions of the spirit realm. One is left wondering whether or not this phenomena is the original horror story, the archetypal nightmare.

Terrifying, beautifully constructed and thought provoking, The Nightmare certainly left me shaken and is not for the faint hearted.

Best watched in the dark, and of course....in bed!
3 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Meadowland (2015)
8/10
An Honest Study of Love and Loss
28 October 2015
This film was heart wrenching but beautiful.

It's a look at the story of how a couple cope with the loss of their son, and the pernicious effects of grief over time. The title itself, Meadowland, seems to be the mental land where the suffering protagonists go to escape, the dream land that exists to maintain the last shreds of hope in the face of overwhelming pain.

It makes an excellent job of conveying the gradual deterioration of the ability to cope with not knowing, not being able to say goodbye and the juxtaposition of the need for closure with the incredible fear of accepting the inevitable.

It's brilliantly acted and well scripted. The pace is slow but filled with mounting intensity. The film holds its breath, never spilling into melodrama, but holding in an enormous sense of tension and conflict, thus creating a direct line of empathy for the situation of the main characters.

But it's not all doom and gloom, well it is all doom and gloom, but it examines that darkness at the place from which it emanates; love.

Poetic and sincere.
22 out of 30 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Interesting Look at Human Nature
14 October 2015
This film was not the best in terms of suspense, thrills or any of the usual excitements audiences have come to expect from films these days. But that being said, it certainly wasn't bad and that's why I like it.

It didn't fit into good guy/bad guy conventions, it didn't give us what we want in terms of a romance and nor did it fulfil our expectations of drama. But it didn't do it out of being inept, it did it on purpose. The film refuses to be conventional and for that purpose it succeeds quite well.

In the end this movie is a bleak but honest look at human nature. No-one is completely innocent, nor completely to blame and that being said you definitely can't call this movie unoriginal. In addition it's very well scripted, well acted and well directed although the direction, like the film itself, is neither here nor there.

However, perhaps precisely because the film is so no-committed in some respects, it doesn't really leave a lasting impression and it certainly wont be rocking any boats. It's kind of like a nice big meal of sweet and sour chicken but without the sweet and sour sauce, if you know what I mean.
4 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Altar (2014)
2/10
Discount Version of The Shining (Very Discount)
13 October 2015
You've got two choices,

1. Watch, The Shining, a classic horror with great acting, directing and inspired cinematography. Or, 2. You can watch, Altar, which is literally a rip-off of that movie which also manages to misunderstand everything that made that movie brilliant and combines that ignorance with bad acting, bad directing and a poor script.

I would leave it there but unfortunately these reviews have to be ten lines minimum, so although I'm tempted to just write...

'Ripping off a superior directors work makes Altar a dull movie' ...over and over again, I'll just add this;

Some still shots of the Gothic English landscape in this movie are quite nice to look at, but nothing about this film, not even that, is original, and there was no point I can think of that would have justified spending the money to make this motion picture. The money would have been better spent on...well...anything else!

So to conclude, before watching Altar, I highly recommend you 'Alter' your mind...eh?...see what I did there?
2 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Babadook (2014)
9/10
Truly Horrifying
12 October 2015
In terms of horror films, you will find few quite as truly horrific as this one. Not only is the plot thrilling and layered with all kinds of terrifying possibilities, the script, acting and direction are sometimes so good that its actually hard to watch.

If you're used to factory line horrors, which churn out jump scares with meaningless stories, then you might find The Babadook a bit outside of your comfort zone. But if, like me, you revel in talented directing, rich metaphors and incredible screen writing, then this is the film for you.

The film has a wonderfully subjective subtext, and massively succeeds in conveying a real sense of the main characters madness through brilliantly inventive directing. It is reminiscent of Polanski's The Tenant in some parts, and just as well presented, but also manages to create something new and fresh.

Honestly though, I've seen hundreds of horror movies, most of them are simply annoying, and a few of them are quite scary, but this film was at times genuinely terrifying. And I haven't felt that way about a movie since I was about ten!

Viewer discretion should be advised however, as the film does tread dangerously close to the issue of child abuse so those who are particularly sensitive in that regard may want to steer clear.

Its not a horror movie for those who don't really want to be horrified. And to me, that means its excellent.
5 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Visit (I) (2015)
6/10
I See Old People...
12 October 2015
Firstly, I apologise for the predictable caption, but it was too tempting. Also, if we do view this movie in light of Shyamalan's, Sixth Sense, then it seems almost casual by comparison. But in its own right this film is both fun and really quite scary!

The film does a great job of misleading us, making us think that we're in for something altogether more light hearted than it actually is, and for that reason the horror moments are all the more effective. Yet it also doesn't push us too far, providing comic relief just when things get a bit too disturbing.

However, despite its well placed scares and cleverly formulated creepiness, its just a bit too much like a ghost train ride to make it worth more than a mention . The scares it uses are for scares sake alone and the director uses his ingredients well but the movie lacks any real meat.

Best watched without first viewing the trailer I believe.
4 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Black Mass (2015)
5/10
Eh, Not Bad for Ten Clams
12 October 2015
As gangster films go, you could do worse, but that being said you could also do better. Admittedly, what makes this film most interesting is Johnny Depp, and if it hadn't been for him the film would be yet another formulaic gangster movie, with all the same clichés and the same basic plot as countless others. Which it is of course, but its just slightly more interesting.

Depp's performance is good because it is unusual for his career. In my opinion Blow was both a better film and better acted, but here Depp plays to his age, which is new, and he does it very well.

Depp's character, James Bulger, was a homicidal psychopath who once stole a poor mans winning lottery ticket so he could add a few extra million dollars to his million dollars. Quite why we should have a film that glamorises that I don't know, but I digress. The point is that Depps performance is so charismatic that we find ourselves rooting for this scumbag until the very end.

Depp's acting aside there are some good moments, but those moments are spread thinly between gangster caricatures and, to be honest, an obvious plot. Its well written, adequately directed and generally strong in most areas but it lacks that special something that would make it deserve to be remembered.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An error has occured. Please try again.

Recently Viewed