“The question is, John, do you hate me more than you love your family.”
Weird, but despite all the negative opinions about this movie, I must confess that I thought it was a entertaining and ingeniously intertwined psychopathic film. I admit, it’s not a simplistic story, sometimes it seems confusing and has a sudden end at which point you sit back and the only thing you can say is “Huh ?”. When you expect a movie with a comprehensible fluently told story, with not too many complications and no shocking impressions, and a happy feel good ending, you better look out for some soft Disney movie .
“Meeting Evil” was a psychotic roller coaster trip where a typical day of a real estate agent very quickly turns into a horrible nightmare with a trip straight to hell. At one time I really had the impression that Samuel L. Jackson was the personification of the devil himself. As if he came straight out of hell, to help the poor guy to take revenge at everyone who made his life hopeless and almost ruined it. Next I had the idea that John (Luke Wilson) was being transferred into a split personality and he himself was on a killing spree. As one of the detectives suggested, it is possible that someone on the verge of a personal bankruptcy and about to lose everything, could snap and start such a mayhem.
Samuel L. Jackson plays the assassin who takes too much satisfaction in killing anyone who in his eyes is disturbingly rude and hypocritical, in a masterful way. His staring was at times stunning. At moments a demonic destructive crazy look. The next moment an understanding and comforting look. Meanwhile using one liners of wisdom and restorative language so that John finally takes matters into his own hands. Luke Wilson had his lesser moments. Sometimes even in a disruptive way. I think that if you have such an experience being tossed around the whole day from one improbable situation to another, you’ll surely have an emotional, anxious and aggressive reaction. But the whole movie he acted as if he was attending a mega funeral. So sad and beaten down. On the other hand, maybe I would be acting in the same way when I was in his situation : an enormous debt, without a job, probably realizing that your wife is playing twister in bed with the muscular young handyman who constructs the pool. Leslie Bibb as John’s wife, surprised me once when she was verbally sweeping the floor with the female detective. The frightened, average housewife suddenly transformed into a fury.
As mentioned, it raises some questions at the end , but I am still convinced that Richie’s statement is close to the ultimate truth . Besides, you can also see at the beginning there’s the intention to shoot John. He had already opened the trunk of his car and his gun ready to shoot , but was stopped by the fact that the little girl with the dog was watching.
There were only few minor things that weren’t that great. First the sometimes rather weird actions of the police. And at the the end the struggle, knife waving and stabbing and hitting with a golf club, looked hugely amateurish. But these disadvantages are outweighed by the whole of this highly entertaining thriller. A perfect film to start another movie weekend.
Maybe it's because I'm getting older and more mature. Or is it simply because it's a perfect movie ? I put all my money on the second guess because in the end I found it an amazing and captivating romantic comedy . Normally I hate movies containing the combination of romance and humor. Usually the humor is of a questionable level and it threatens to become a corny tearjerker with a predictable happy ending where everyone is happily married. Actually all of that is in this movie , but not on a grotesquely sentimental level as in other chick flicks . Like someone said on IMDb " A chick flick for men" .
Occasionally, I have to listen to my wife and select a movie which will lead to a cozy movie night she can enjoy. Instead of watching again at some nerve wrecking, bloody and violent SF or thriller. With much reluctance I try to look for that kind of movie. The thing that convinced me to choose for "About time" was the SF label it got . Ultimately, the SF part is essential for the whole story, but it is not the crucial element which leaves a lingering impression. It's just a great movie where you get sucked in from the beginning and you feel like you're in the center of the story. Tim has a gift that all men possess in his family . He can go back in time . Not to change (kill Hitler/shag Helen of Troy ) world history .Only situations occurring in his personal life he can change. He wants to use that gift to find the love of his life.
It has immensely funny situations and humorous conversations . I laughed at this film more than any would-be comedy that I have seen in recent months. Those funny situations that happen are so recognizable and pure. Nothing forced, no complicated puns or fetched trivialities . The conversation in the dark restaurant run by blind people . Who came up with that? Their first night and the way Tim returns again and again in time . The frustrations Tim shows while helping Mary to choose an evening dress. I understood him perfectly.Meeting Mary's parents . The one-liners that passed from time to time.The awkward friends like Jay and Rory . Uncle D who was moving in a certain way , but at the same time hilarious. Every time my wife and I laughed about it.
It's enormously romantic. God yes, you get that in a romantic comedy . But it's that romance that also occurs infinite times in real life and not the romance you read in cheap pulp magazines. Sometimes it was brought subtle. Tim could easily use his gift to have a hot night with Charlotte .Finally he says no to that thought and runs back to Mary to ask her to marry him. A symbolic way to show that Mary is his true love . The scene with the live band was also hilarious.
The film also has its emotional moments . These are the moments where the sticker " Beware of irritating objects in the eye" applies to. The relationship with his father gets gradually warmer and caring. The concerns about his sister Kit Kat . The death of his father and the special way he definitively says goodbye. Serene, catchy and stunning. The casting is perfect.
Each character feels like a real individual and fits into the complete picture . Both physically and mentally. Tim is a daydreaming , sometimes awkward but sensitive guy . Domhnall Gleeson delivers a magnificent performance . I didn't recognize him as Bill Weasley of the Potter series , and even as Clan Techie from Dredd . Rachel McAdams who plays Mary is a natural beauty and a charm throughout the film . Bill Nighy puts a rock-solid portrait of the father who struggles with his feelings towards his son. Lindsey Duncan has no big part in this movie, but each time she comes into the picture she has the look of a caring mother. Honestly , there wasn't a single character that I found weak. Finally the soundtrack is also worth a mention . Songs of The Cure , Amy Winehouse , Nick Cave and Ben Folds were a splendid contribution to the overall mood. I've always liked movies.
I watch movies because I want a relaxing moment , a moment to laugh or bite my nails cause of the tension, or nearly get a heart attack from scaring , or sympathize with certain events and sometimes cry a little bit about it . Those are the reasons to watch a movie. And that I found in this movie . My advice is to just give this one a chance and let yourself be carried away on a sentimental and funny roller-coaster ride of emotions.
Never heard of Riddick or seen any of the previous films ? I would recommend to move along an skip it . Briefly I assumed that this was a self-standing SF , not knowing that this was the continuation of two previous movies . Weird, I had never heard of Riddick. For me it was like reading a book written in braille . You can see that there's something , but you can't understand a thing from it. After 20 minutes I had no idea what was actually going on and what Riddick was talking about.
I limit myself only to the way the movie looks and ignore the story. It would be unfair to judge the movie on that part. The images of the desolate planet where Riddick ended up ( I suppose it was actually the intention to execute him there), looked quite futuristic and menacing . Only thing what bothered me after a while was the predominant orange color . It looked like a stadium full of supporters from Holland at a World Cup football match . A sea of orange hues . The life threatening species looked stunning in terms of computer animation . Especially the hyena -like desert dogs I found a success and the relation (if you can call it that way) that Riddick had with the puppy was sometimes amusing to see . I found it a pity that it died in the end . The scorpion-like monsters that were in the mud looked convincing in close-up. Only at a distance they looked like rubber-figures.
Riddick was a really cool figure who acted like a half-god with those glittering eyes , his apparently invulnerable body and its ability to predict the ending of certain situations . When the bounty hunters land on the planet it all became more interesting for me. Especially the figure Santana was damn well played with his boastful arrogance and condescending view towards others . The result was a few punches, especially from Dahl , on his tanned face . It's always amusing when some annoying person gets a good spanking. The systematic elimination of the bounty hunters was entertaining and the climax was the cut of head from Santana. A nicely timed and filmed moment. I didn't think the ending was such a success and looked more like a scene from " Alien" but in a sort of Sahara . Furthermore the hover bikes looked like an updated version from those of " Looper " . And the spaceships looked suspicious alike like those that Zod flew in " Man of Steel " . Don't know who stole that idea from whom.
I wasn't that impressed about the movie "Riddick" . The interaction between the bounty hunters on the one hand and the calculated and cold-blooded Riddick on the other hand were positive. I found that Riddick was sometimes an oracle who could feel how things would work out. Perhaps this was a characteristic of the Riddick himself. The biggest drawback was the lack of knowledge of the prehistory . Perhaps a brief summary at the beginning would have been an option.
"Above the clouds, everything's pure, beautiful. Sometimes I wonder…
why would anyone ever want to return to the ground?"
Ever seen "Chariot"? It's also a low-budget thriller taking place on an aircraft with a limited number of protagonists. The difference with "Skybound" is that it took place on board of a much larger aircraft. But the main difference is the entertainment content and solidity of "Chariot" compared to the emptiness and the lack of inspiration in "Skybound". Not only was the acting sometimes stiff, the conversations were occasionally laughably bad and you can not call it exciting either. But especially the improbabilities and completely ridiculous situations ensured that this otherwise well-cared-for movie ended up in a downward spiral, so that my appreciation also ended up in an arrow-fast nosedive. It started interesting but eventually it irritated me in such a way that I wished this luxurious airplane (Freedom XJ One. I'm sure this type doesn't even exist) would really crash onto the surface of the earth.
The opening scene shows Lisa (Scarlett Byrne) and her date Matt (Rick Cosnett) who are on their way to enjoy a nice weekend, together with a friendly couple. I suppose Lisa and Matt just met, since Matt immediately apologized for driving around in a very expensive car. That means Matt assumes that she doesn't know he's from a wealthy family. And apparently he's also unaware of the fact that she knows his brother brother Kyle (Gavin Stenhouse). Well, wealthy sons have so little free time and therefore spend a minimum of time together, I suppose. Then Matt brings the joyful news that they fly to Malibu, along with Odin (Tyler Fayose) and girlfriend Roxy (Carla Carolina Pimental). And when it turns out that Kyle also has to fly along as co-pilot, you already know that this will be a turbulent flight. Next there's also a stowaway on board who wasn't only looking for food. And landing the plane later on isn't so obvious either, since there is no landing spot to be detected on the surface of the earth.
You thought "Snakes on a plane" was utter crappy and totally whacked. You'll call it a true masterpiece after watching "Skybound". Most of the low-budget films have poorer film quality and amateur-like acting. But in some cases it also has an ingenious, quirky story-line. Strangely enough, this low-budget film is the opposite. The used images aren't that bad at all. The acting isn't disastrous and the idiocy is more due to the choices made by the script writer. But it missed a tad of tension and an atmosphere of total despair. Also the story is as empty as a bottle of wine in the hands of an alcoholic and there are several events that are too stupid for words. It sometimes feels as if they did that deliberately though. For instance. To my surprise, a whole plane was demolished while the entrance door stood wide open and everyone walked calmly around as if it was plain normal. The given situation wouldn't bother me, was it not that they already opened that same door to refresh the air in the plane while everybody was securely tightened. Because the pressure and wind could unintentionally catapult someone from the plane. Weird, not?
And there are a lot of other absurd, ridiculous situations. A perfectly round bullet wound and a bullet being removed perfectly lying flat. And then the amazing speed with which the wounded person recuperates from this wound. Plus the fact that a grown man still believes that the name Odin comes from an African God. One could argue that this is a reflection of the intellectual level of the entire film. But then there are suddenly intelligent statements about the "Traffic Alert and Collision Avoidance" system and the artificial pressure in an airplane. An airplane I'm not eager to take given the firmness with which engines are attached. And lets not forget the totally unlikely ending.
Low-budget B-movies may not be popular, but there are still people who love an old-fashioned survival film that doesn't take itself too seriously (including myself). There are probably more similar low-budget films dealing with an apocalyptic world end with similar stupid content. But most of the time the visual aspects in these films are also of a poorly low level. That's also the most positive feature you can find in "Skybound". The professional looking camera hots (besides the kitschy ice-letters in the clouds at the beginning) which sometimes are the same level as that of blockbusters with a million budget. "Skybound" is a negligible film that leaves no lasting impression. In other words, it certainly isn't a high-flier.
In "Olympus has fallen" and "London has fallen" Gerard Butler took care of the president of America and fought against a whole battalion of terrorists. In "A family man" Dane Jensen (Gerard Butler) has to fight other demons. On the one hand there's his hectic and energy-hungry job as headhunter. A job he lives for and that keeps him occupied for at least 70 hours a week without exception. And on the other hand there's his charming wife Elise (Gretchen Mol), his son Ryan (Max Jenkins) and daughter Lauren (Julia Butters). A warm family that never lacks anything thanks to Dane's efforts. On a materialistic level that is. Because each and every one of them craves for the presence of a husband and a father figure. Dane may be physically present but in reality he's always busy with his work. This results in displeasure and frustration. Dan always acts like a businessman. When Ryan seems to gain weight, he reacts pragmatically. He just gets up at an inhuman hour to go jogging with his son.
The psychological pressure increases when Dane's boss Ed Blackridge (Willem Dafoe) announces that he's thinking of a well-deserved retirement and passes on his position to the person who can present the best annual figures. You don't have to be a Nostradamus to predict what effect this has on Dan. And then it turns out that Ryan's overweight is not because of playing "Assassin's creed" for hours while enjoying loads of snacks. It's a swollen spleen due to a severe form of leukemia that causes his waistline to increase. Most viewers (including myself) will start rolling their eyes and shake their heads. Not again another sentimental story with that horrible disease as a central theme and the inner conflict certain people will feel. In this case it's Dan who has to find the right balance between his competitive job and the welfare of his son. And he comes to the realization that no compromises can be made or illegal tricks can be used in such a way that the aggravation of the disease can be avoided.
The message is crystal clear after a while. The whole karma and "What goes around comes around" principle is really emphatically emphasized. It's all about that moment when you realize that you shouldn't take everything for granted and you start realizing what's really important in life. I wouldn't be surprised if Dan decided to convert to the monotheistic religion of the Sikhs and move to India to live there as righteous Punjab. The transformation from unscrupulous, senseless workaholic into an insightful family man whose priorities suddenly changed completely, was enormously predictable. But despite that predictability and cheesiness, I couldn't resist to look at the rest of this über-emotional tearjerker.
In terms of content it was perhaps very syrupy sweet and not very original. But in terms of interpretation I can only respect Gerard Butler whose acting-past is richly filled with action-rich roles where an elaborated character wasn't really required. As King Leonidas in "300" and Mike Banning in "London / Olympus has fallen" he only had to be fearless, ruthless and determined. So no complex feelings and character traits. The implausible wasn't due to his acting performance, but due to a reasonably weak script. The most eye-catching and praiseworthy acting is for Max Jenkins who, despite his young age, delivers an admirable performance. Ryan was portrayed realistically by this young boy. The rest of the cast took care of the no less important roles, but they weren't not so explicitly in the spotlight. Gretchen Mol as the disgruntled wife (but on the other hand she was in a privileged position thanks to the well-payed job of her husband). Alison Brie, the ravishing rival of Dan. Willem Dafoe as the single, tyrannical CEO whose life was only focused on making loads of money. And Alfred Molino in a modest role as an unemployed engineer at age, who only serves as a toy in Dan's head hunter's game.
I am not a hypersensitive type or over-sentimental, but when a drama with this kind of subject doesn't not touch me or moves me, then something is wrong. Either it's totally unbelievable or it's so predictable. I'm afraid the movie just follows a well-known path without deviating, so that it has little interesting to offer. Towards the end, I said to my wife: "If that little boy wakes up now, I'll eat my shoe." Never knew that shoe soles were so chewy.
Cage can put this one on his "Senseless contribution to meaningless film that brings grist to the mill"-list, because this was a typical mainstream movie. It's been several weeks since I've seen it, and to be honest I can't remember much of it. That's usually a sign that it wasn't a very good film and failed to impress me after all. About Cage's performance we can be brief. As brief as the time he appeared in the film in an unconvincing way. Apparently Cage joined the club of action heroes who choose one soulless trashy movie after another just to collect some pocket money (with the exception of "Joe" I've heard). Even the fact of Anakin Skywalker waving dangerously with his sword in this adventure film, can't change the fact that the final result is disappointingly weak. Probably the pubescent teenage girls present in the audience will experience this as a plus point, but that's the only positive contribution I can think of.
The story begins with Gallain (Nicolas Cage) and Jacob (Hayden Christensen) as two fiery crusaders in the Middle East where they spend their time with cutting up a few Muslims into pieces. Jacob however, with an extremely modern haircut, passes a for Gallain sensitive border and the two eventually go their separate ways. I found it astonishing that they ended up in China. That must have been a very long walk. In this medieval China the king's son Shing (Andy On) can whistle for the throne since the dying king appointed his youngest son Zhao (Bill Su Jiahang) as his heir. Out of fear of revenge, the king sends Zhao together with his charming sister Lian (Liu Yifei) and a royal seal to a safer place. Don't be amazed, but on the way to their safe harbor, they meet Jacob, who now looks more like a premature hippie under the influence of opium, who takes them under his wing.
It looks a bit like what Viggo Mortensen's job was, while being on the road with those hobbits in "The Lord of The Rings". A heroic warrior who acts like a security guard for some innocent and vulnerable young people. And although I always admired Nicolas Cage a lot, this became nevertheless a tedious and very bad movie. Not only has the subject been used a zillion times, there's also a pile of clichés and an atrocious acting Cage. Ultimately, he's not the central figure in this film, although he stands explicitly in the foreground on the movie poster.
Obviously the Chinese princess would fall for Jacob and the small Zhao looking up to him as a super hero whose adventures he followed for years in some comic magazine, was also nothing new under the sun. This movie is not even an alternative to pass your time on a rainy Sunday. Closing your eyes and taking a nap, would be more satisfying. Terrible action scenes (too close and nauseating shaking images) are being followed by incomprehensible fragments. I still can't understand that an army diligently seeks for the two royal children and still can't recognize them when they go into a town before their eyes. And how Jacob could kill an opponent who's riding a horse by using a bow and arrow at a ridiculous far distance and knowing that he usually stumbles around completely drugged, is absolutely ridiculous.
Eventually only Jiahang, Yifei and On acted convincing enough. I asked myself what fashion statement Cage wanted to make by wearing that absurd woolly hat at the end. That was a complete mystery to me. But eventually it matched his entire role : ridiculous. Now I understand why the Chinese distributor Yunnan Film Group ceased the release of this movie a few hours before the screening in thousands of cinemas. It probably has something to do with the Chinese have learned from a young age that they can never lose their face.
Are you a fan of "Saw" and other related torture movies, this will be your cup of tea. But if you were tired of the whole "Saw" saga after part three, you better skip "The Collection" because you can't call it very original. This sequel to "The Collector" (which I've never seen) begins impressive, has an anticipated open end and is terribly boring in the middle, with ridiculously improbable situations. It's never really exciting and ultimately it becomes a cat and mouse game in a big, abandoned hotel, full of deadly and insane booby traps and with rooms that look more surreal as time goes by. To make it somewhat entertaining, I recommend to get a scarf and hat and equip yourself with bells and flags, so that you can encourage the contestants as a real enthusiastic supporter.
Because of the short running time, there's no wasting of time at the beginning of the film. In a flash, we're informed that the city is attacked by a ruthless serial killer called "The Collector". We meet Elena (Emma Fitzpatrick) being towed along by some friends to an obscure secret nightclub. After a skirmish there with her boyfriend, she discovers a suitcase with Arkin (Josh Stewart) trapped in it. Arkin is a victim of the first film who survived and escaped his imprisonment. Only the nightmare starts back again here and short after you'll get to see the most hallucinatory massacre ever. I did something I rarely do. I re-watched that part twice in a row. Once this bloody part is over, you can say that you've watched the best part and from here on it's just a very long carnage. The creators of the film (especially the writer Patrick Melton, who is also responsible for SAW IV, V, VI and VII) paid more attention to the level of sadism than the story itself. You can easily guess what'll come next. Elena is kidnapped by "The Collector" and Arkin is recruited as a guide for a group of mercenaries to rescue her out of the hands of this sadist.
Putting this film in the same league as "Saw", is for the latter a little unworthy. The concept of "Saw" was of a very different nature and was put together somewhat subtler. I must admit that "Saw" impressed me. "Jigsaw" kidnapped people because he felt they deserved it, because of the sins they have committed in the past. The choice they had was to save themselves from their situation in a painful way or simply die. "The Collector" had no exact plan in mind in my opinion. He's simply a psychopath who transforms his victims into grotesque artworks and saves it in formaldehyde. Or he uses them as a favorite pastime and tortures them brutally. His identity is not revealed in this film. It remains a sinister stranger who occasionally puts on a mask and starts killing brutally.
It's totally absurd to talk about character development, because that's missing completely. First you have the seemingly invincible killer who has a built-in GPS system because he always appears at the right time and in the right place in this fairly large hotel. And next we have a bunch of mercenaries who will solve the problem. The fact that the one they are hunting just reshaped a whole gang of disco goers into ready-to-eat barbecue packets, apparently doesn't impress them and they enter unfamiliar terrain seemingly carefree. Their fate is also in hands of one person who knew where this lugubrious building was situated just by using clues he carved into his arm. I would clear off and leave the job to a whole army of soldiers.
There are also inexplicable moments in this film. The way they free themselves out of the metal cage is nonsense. And especially if you see how that person swings into action afterwards, as if it's hunky dory. Most serial killers in other slasher movies have a motive and a pattern. This "Collector" guy apparently doesn't have a clue about any plan and just goes on doing stuff. He kills, chops and cuts around, slices and assembles bodies, tortures and torments when he has time. He uses all kinds of instruments to achieve his goal (not like Michael Myers who invariably uses a butcher knife) and also he drugs a whole bunch of victims so they can be used as an army of zombies against intruders. And that's not all. He also has a collection of raging dogs and tarantulas. You see, there's enough variation. Ultimately, it's just a mediocre film with a great deal of attention for the traps and the bloody effects of them. It's a tough film and the pace is very fast. So fast that you may have missed some slaughtering. Don't worry ! In the end you get a second chance to watch it again during the end credits. The end invites for a successor, but I'm sure I'm going to skip it.
"Remember boy ! The more painful the treatment, the more they respect the Barber."
"The Physician" is a beautiful, old-fashioned adventure film, situated in the dark ages with its poverty and unsanitary conditions. In those days the church still had some influence so it punished any scientific progress because these odious practices were against the will of God. And despite the terrible poverty, they were showing up in a flash in order to extort the last money those poor people had, as a compensation for some ritual they've performed. The same happened to Rob after the passing of his mother. In these dark times people died of an innocent appendicitis or pneumonia. Rob is abandoned to his fate but sees a chance to travel with an itinerant quack who performs surgery in a questionable manner and sells healing potions most likely manufactured from horse urine. When Rob is told that in the distant Middle East, a man named Ibn Sina teaches medicine and puts this knowledge into practice, his decision made. He leaves for the Middle East to be educated by this wise man. The only requirement is that he must appear as a Jew. This also had some consequences for his foreskin
A fascinating historical film made in Germany ("Der Medicus'). First I was surprised that this was a German film since it has the look and feel of a Hollywood movie. In retrospect it's also a bit logical. The book this film is based on and written by Noah Gordon, was not a success in the US, but all the more in Germany. It was also massively viewed in Germany and they made a mini TV series out of it. The rest of Europe unfortunately will only enjoy this wonderful film when it comes out on DVD. It's a successful film with a lot of attention paid to the sets, costumes, music and CGI. If you add the even brilliant performances to it, you finally end up with an admirable and excellent product. The 150 minutes are over before you know it, because you are sucked into the story in a way.
The performances were extraordinarily beautiful. Tom Payne as the inquisitive and innocent looking Rob, Stellan Skarsgard ("The Railway Man," "Kill your Darlings) as the itinerant quack who takes care of Rob and at the same time knows absolutely no compassion sometimes. I didn't recognize Emma Rigby immediately, even though I only just saw her at work in "Plastic". Her fake appearance in that movie (botox treatment most likely) was transformed miraculously into a more natural appearance. But what elevates this film to a higher level, is the casting of Ben Kingsley as the Persian philosopher who wants to pass his knowledge to motivated pupils and at the same time exhibits an unprecedented hunger for knowledge. A masterful performance and a realistic portrayal of Ibn Sina, the Muslim physician, philosopher, physicist and scientist who made important contributions to medicine and whose studies were respected in Europe for a long time. Apparently Kingsley likes playing the role of a physician or psychologist. He has the appropriate appearance and his charismatic personality is perfect for it. Just watch "Shutter Island" or "Stone Hearst Asylum" and you'll see.
But also the overall appearance of the film looks grand and wonderful. From shabby, dark and especially dingy London to the oriental scenes in distant Persia and the Madrasa College. The costume department has done its utmost to display it as authentic as possible. How Philipp Stölzl and Jan Berger have shaped this film and managed to make a movie with Hollywood proportions, is admirable. The only drawback is that there are also some Hollywood clichés like the storyline about Rebecca and Rob. Fortunately they avoided to show epic grand battles and focused on Ibn Sina and the influence of religion in that time. The only thing that bothered me personally was the so-called gift Rob had. The timeless topics about health and religious fanaticism dominate this wonderful film. Some won't like the old-fashioned tone, but in the end I really enjoyed this medieval adventure film. A film set in an era when the Middle East was a source of knowledge and progress.
"What do you think happens to us when we die?
I don't know.
I guess it's a lot like it is before you're born."
First of all, let me warn all of you who assume that this is a continuation of the 1984 masterpiece "Gremlins". Believe me, this movie has nothing to do with it. Not even close. Not when it's about the level of entertainment. Not content wise. And certainly not when you look at the acting skills. If there was one particular aspect that got on my nerves while watching this B-category horror, it was the terrible acting. Not only was it silly sometimes. But it felt so amateurish and forced. There is not even a sparkle of humor present in this movie. No malicious Gremlins who organize an orgy in a local pub. Or an elderly lady being launched while sitting in her chair lift. Or were the moronic conversations meant to be humorous? I'm afraid not.
However, the starting point and basic idea were quite inventive and original. A metallic cube, with a clock-looking image full of astrological drawings, that contains something you don't want to be confronted with. And there's only one golden rule that'll make sure you'll get rid of this detestable thing. You just have to pass it on to someone you love. Talking about a dilemma. A poisoned gift for someone you really love. And that's what James eventually did when his family probably already has been liquidated by the bloodthirsty creature. He gives it to his mother. Little did he know there were more family members in his mum's house at that moment. And before you know it, the little creature begins using its sharp limbs and bodies start piling up. Eventually it's Adam Thatcher (Adam Hampton) who's shackled to the devilish box.
The most positive thing about this indie horror, is the design of the-creature-with-a-tireless-killer-instinct. Despite the fact that the budget is significantly lower than most movies with computer-generated creatures, they've succeeded in creating a highly realistic little monster. But, as in "Big ass spider", the non-proportionally shaped copy is of much lower quality. It looks like a fake, plastic figure that comes to life using stop motion techniques (Even "Shaun the sheep" looks better). Similar to the giant insects in SF films of the 70s. Also content wise it was quite creative. For example, it's not obvious for the Thatcher family to get rid of the cube. If they think that they are put out of their misery just by randomly passing it on to someone (a bit as how the problem was solved in "It follows"), they are in for a disappointment. Apparently, the mysterious creature can feel in a certain way that you don't really love the new owner. The fact that the box shows up over and over again, regardless of what Adam is trying to do, was to be expected. To be honest, it was utterly annoying after numerous attempts.
If this film was made in the 80's, the end product would be appropriate and undoubtedly added to other released monster-horror films. Unfortunately, the looks of the gremlin (I still wonder why it's called that way), the rare exciting moments (the confrontation between daughter Anna (Katie Burgess) and the monster) and the intriguing subject won't make it a great movie. And this is caused, in particular, the inadequate acting, the stupidities, the sometimes bad SE's (especially the wounds looked kitschy) and the limited story line. The naivety with which certain problems are solved, is sometimes quite ridiculous (like hiding bodies in the basement). And once again, the policemen aren't smarter than the two idiots from "Dumb and Dumber". Most hilarious moment was the response of a detective who advised detective Harris (Kyle Pennington) to contact Lucy Anifero, a gypsy and apparently someone who knows something about occult and bizarre things. After Harris got a decent explanation about the devilish cube, the first comment of this detective was : "She's hot, right?". You can't expect that such an idiot would solve the case.
Are you a fan of such a type of SF-horror and you're a fan of anything that's related to the 80's, I can recommend it (there's even an Alien-like fragment). You won't be flabbergasted and you won't be blown away by world-shocking novelties, but it can provide brief entertainment.
PS. I read this hilarious review on Letterboxd and actually summarizes it a bit : My roommate and I decided to watch a movie tonight. I asked her if she wanted to watch The Dark Tower, 'cause I hadn't seen it yet. She said "No, I've already seen it and it's the worst movie of the year". So we watched this instead. Once it was over, her only comment was "We should have watched The Dark Tower…"
"You know those movies where the picture just starts to slow down… and melt?
Then catch fire?
Well… that's Berlin."
What was the overall feeling after watching "Atomic Blonde"? For me it was a mixture of confusion and excitement at the same time. Confusion because of the complex story with a multitude of twists and spy related mumbo jumbo. To be honest, I always have that with this kind of movies. So you can assume that I'm not a big fan of espionage movies. Not even James Bond movies. Even though these story lines are rather straightforward and simplistic in my eyes. "Atomic Blonde" on the other hand is in a different league. At a certain point I didn't know anymore what was going on and what role the main characters played. I even forgot the main goal. The only things I still could re-imagine in the end, were the fierce action scenes and the appetizing looking curves of Charlize Terron. Should all female spies in a movie use the same wardrobe as Terron did here, I instantly would become a fervent fan of this genre. There's nothing so exciting as a blonde shrew, wearing sensual knee-length boots and sexy suspenders, who gives her male opponents a solid kick in their glockenspiel.
Guess what. I was more excited about the soundtrack used here. Perhaps this was disruptive to some but personally I thought this was pleasant addition. Well, maybe it's because I'm a hard-core fan of music from the 80's. And I'm not talking about boys-bands or disco music, but the underground and alternative kind of music. Unfortunately, they had to choose the most annoying song from the entire Neue Deutsche Welle repertoire. During that period I often wished for Nena to disappear with her 99 air balloons beyond the horizon. It would have been way better to include "Stunde des Glücks" from Fehlfarben or "Schlachtet!" From Grauzone. But besides this weak moment, I was pleasantly surprised to hear "Cities in dust" from Siouxsie & the Banshees, "Cat People" by David Bowie and "I ran" from A flock or seagulls. In terms of mood, this musical framework certainly made for a positive feeling. In retrospect, I'll remember this playlist more than the movie itself.
It's all about an ultra-secret list (hidden in a wristwatch) with names of spies who are actively working in the Soviet Union doing … uh … I suppose spy-work. The entire film is situated in dark Berlin of the 80's, where the ultimate symbol of the cold war still stands. The Berlin wall. It's in the shadow of this gray decor where this spy movie takes place. In this post-war city, Lorraine Broughton (Charlize Theron) tries to get the list back together with colleague spy David Percival (James McAvoy), who has his own agenda apparently. The fact there are other sharks in this spy-pond who are interested in getting that list, is something Lorraine experiences real soon. The entire story is displayed in flashback mode. The whole story is being told by Lorraine during a debriefing in the presence of Eric Gray (Toby Jones), some superior at MI6, and Emmett Kurzfeld (John Goodman) from the C.I.A. What follows are some bad-ass action sequences that'll thrill you. Unfortunately, these impressive, action-filled scenes are no guarantee to make it a memorable movie .
Perhaps it was the intention to make a female "John Wick" spin-off. But unlike the latter, where action scenes followed each other in a breathtaking pace, this movie only contains three (sublime choreographed) violent and action-packed scenes. First the German Polizei notices that the color of their green uniforms is replaced by the color of emerging bruises and dripping blood. And as icing on the cake you'll be presented with a damn elongated scene where KGB agents are being banged up pretty bad. Next you'll see an intense car chase across Berlin. And then you'll get a plot twist involving double agents and counterespionage shizzle. And that's where I suddenly lost the thread. To be honest, that's it in a nutshell. Even the lesbian it's-supposed-to-be-a-hot scene wasn't interesting enough to get me ecstatic. In my view, this was added just so the presence of Delphine Lasalle (Sofia Boutella) seemed functional again.
In terms of acting, it was quite all right, although Charlize Theron impressed me more as Furiosa in "Mad Max: Fury Road". James McAvoy was sublime. But then again, I thought he was more convincing as the guy with a split personality in "Split". Eddie Marsan, John Goodman and Toby Jones complete the rest of the cast and showed once again their acting skills. But despite the brilliant acting, the violent and furious action, the atmospheric images and a soundtrack which made me feel young again, I thought the story-line was incoherent, quite inconsistent and superfluous. You can't call it the counterpart of "John Wick". And for those who say this film is amazing because of the fact that it's an action movie with a female action heroine in it, I suggest to look up these movies and re-watch them : "Alien", "Terminator", "Salt" or "Kill Bill". You'll also see an action heroine with giant cajones, who's filleting the other sex (or species) without blinking an eye. But still, highly recommended.
"I never seen nothing like this.
Well, you might want to have a little chat with the father. He's dead. In fact, he died in the sticks too, about 13 years ago.
No, I mean the father of the baby she's carrying.
This girl's about four months pregnant."
Not long ago I received an invitation to attend the premiere of "Cold Moon" in the company of the creators and actors, including Christopher Lloyd. Needless to say, I was slightly excited at that moment. Imagine me being in the same room together with one of my youth idols. Together in the same movie theater with Dr. Emmett Brown, the crazy professor who made the time-spiral unsafe with his converted Deloreon in "Back to the Future". Would I be as enthusiast about the movie in question, I would have been mad at myself for not booking a flight. Unfortunately, the enthusiasm was totally absent while watching the screener that was sent to me. Even though "Cold Moon" is similar to those cheap 80s vintage horror-films. I get melancholic when I think about that period. In those days, I always came home overloaded with a stack of rented VHS cassettes, after which I sat down in front of the TV the whole weekend.
"Cold moon" is an ordinary crime story that could serve as an episode in the Columbo series. However, there are also supernatural entities scaring the living sh*t out of the perpetrator (although he turns his back to them during most confrontations. Nerves of steel, I guess). And all this begins the day Margaret Larkin (Sara Catherine Bellamy) is on her way home and is being thrown into the local creek with her bike. She drowns on the spot. When her body is caught by a fisherman out of the water, it's the beginning of a search for the perpetrator (That shouldn't be such a hard task for the sheriff, since it's such a small community). Grandmother Evelyn Larkin (Candy Clark) points her accusatory finger at Nathan Redfield (Josh Stewart), son of James Redfield (Christopher Lloyd) tycoon and founder of the only bank there.
And at the same time, Margaret's wicked spirit winches itself out of the water and starts to haunt the killer. It's not entirely clear why Margaret returns as a revenge-seeking spirit. It's also unclear why the identity of the perpetrator was announced so quickly. In my opinion, the rest of the movie must be damn intriguing enough and of high quality when doing that. There's no tension anymore. And that's the big drawback in this movie. It's not really scary or thrilling. A horror without creepy moments or a frightening atmosphere can hardly be called a horror. Even though the apparitions and ghostly images are at times quite successful.
The acting performances are equivalent to that of the overall atmosphere of the film. Rather bland with a few exceptions. The only one who sort of made an impression was Josh Stewart. Although most of the time he walks around with sleepy, semi-closed eyes due to the amount of alcohol he consumed throughout the day. He doesn't look like a real manic psychopath, but his personality shows some dark sides. Christopher Lloyd's role is no big deal and is limited to a few minutes. The only thing he does is gaze at the local beauty queen (Rachel "Miss Pie" Brooke Smith) while jabbering unintelligible sentences. And then you have Evelyn (Candy Clark) and Jerry Larkin (Chester "My father die" Rushing), trying to run a blueberries farm. You can't say it's high-quality acting during their short-term presence. Especially Candy Clark was an annoying character who constantly acts hysterically after the death of her granddaughter.
"Cold Moon" isn't extremely bad, but it wasn't convincing either. Personally, I think the movie poster is brilliant, but overall the movie is just a weak attempt. The attempt to make some kind of horror didn't work well. The movie has nostalgic value. Certainly if you've experienced the 80's intensely when talking about horror movies. I'm sure you'll see this movie on some television channel in the middle of the night in the future. However, I wouldn't stay up for it.
"You're never going to be happy cooking for someone else."
If there's one thing I really hate, it's those countless cooking television shows (and variations) we get on our plate (how appropriate) recent years. They even founded television channels like "24 Kitchen" and "Njam" where you can view cooking 24 hours a day. How is it possible. You can't even surf your TV-channels on an average night without bumping into some cooking program where they are preparing a delicious dish again. I'm sick and tired of hearing the terminology like baking,flaming, roasting, steaming, filleting, Bain-Marie, stewing, poaching, ragout, caramelize and the hype-word in recent years "cuisson". I'm not sick of seeing those plates with tasty food, but the oversupply of television programs with people cooking enthusiastically. Suddenly, any known chef de cuisine or unknown cooking amateur has a TV-show where they can demonstrate their skills while brandishing a wooden spoon.
Why the hell would I watch a movie like "Chef"? Especially when I already know in advance that it's mainly about cooking. Perhaps out of curiosity? The only cooking-related films I've ever seen are "Ratatouille" (where there's even a rat in charge) and "La Grande Bouffe" (but this film showed the art of cooking in a very different lurid way). Maybe it's because Jon Favreau played the leading role. Not that I've seen him acting that much. He had a small part in "Friends" years ago, he starred in "The Break-up" and he also did something in "Iron Man" and "The Wolf of Wall Street". He also directed the first successful "Iron Man". But it's his charisma that convinced me. He looks like a cheerful and sociable chubby guy who converses in a fairly amusing and slightly lisping manner. Looking at the size of his waist I guess he's also a fan of culinary excesses and therefore he's perfect for this role as chef. And then there's also the pleasure of admiring Sofia Vergara as Inez, the ex-wife of Carl. What a killer babe. I'll never understand why someone would want to divorce such an adorable,sensual person. I'm sure her butt look more appetizing than that of the pig that Carl cuts into pieces in the beginning of the film.
Cooking in itself is a central theme in this film, but the main focus is on other matters. Firstly, there is the father-son relationship that has grown crooked after a while. Carl focused fully on his prestigious place in the kitchen, so he ignored and neglected his son Percy (Emjay Anthony). The whole film is about the recovery of that relationship and rediscovering each other in a beautiful, serene, sometimes funny and sometimes sad way. Secondly, it shows how in today's society it's seemingly dead simple to ruin someones career simply by writing a destructive review. The consequences of a flame-war could have far-reaching consequences. Especially if the virtual brawl goes viral. And then it shows once again how that virtual world is merged with our daily life The way Percy uses Facebook, Twitter and other online services while driving around America with a food truck, is perhaps a bit exaggerated, but it is an example of the impact of the internet nowadays.
"Chef" is nothing more than just another film in which the main character is successful in the beginning, has to go through a deep valley with the known setbacks and towards the end he rises again unscathed from the battle as a conquering hero. And in "Chef" everything really turns out all right again. This is not an ordinary feel-good movie, but an extraordinary feel-good movie. But despite that, you can really enjoy other things. The juicy lingo of his two confidants Tony and Martin. The enthusiasm Percy shows during the trip. Yet a little warning though : make sure you have eaten firmly before you watch this film, because I guarantee you'll be running into the kitchen now and then to get a snack. At times it looks so delicious and appetizing, I spontaneously started to drool. Those browned butter filled Cuban grill sandwiches were so painfully slow prepped, it was almost a torture. A 3D flat screen TV with scents option, would have been ideal at that particular moment.
A blandly and not too complicated film. In cooking terms one can summarize it as follows: it's not expensive haute cuisine but simple food that they serve us here. A film with a positive attitude (rare nowadays) with beautiful renditions and a surprising supporting cast. Dustin Hoffman as the old restaurant owner who only trusts a classic,safe menu and doesn't feel like following the new trends. Scarlett Johansson as a colleague of Carl who supports him on all fronts. Robert Downey Jr. as the eccentric rich man who helps Carl getting started. Jon Favreau who still has the passion to create eatable art even when things get him down. Emjay Anthony is doing everything to get back his father's attention he's entitled to and at the same time shows his talents. And the whole film is dressed with a sauce of hugely catchy music. Normally I don't pay attention to the soundtrack, but in this film it fits like a glove. The Salsa music creates that summer feeling, the blues kicks in when it starts to be corny and "Sexual Healing" is sung a capella. The soundtrack is a perfect ingredient for this tasty movie. Don't expect profound life lessons in "Chef". But the end result is still a pleasant and definitely tasty-looking ride. Favreau supplies a genuine end product that tastes moreish ...
"You should never stop thinking about a life you've taken. That's the price you pay for taking it."
Now this was a really bizarre movie. The only thing that sticks in my mind is that it's a terribly slow film with a brilliant soundtrack. After watching "Chef" I was starving. After watching "The Rover" I was very thirsty. It's obvious that this film, which is set in Australia in a post-apocalyptic period, will automatically be compared with "Mad Max". And despite that there are many elements of excellent quality, it's just a dead simple storyline which is blown up out of proportion in a bombastic and rather pretentious way so the artistic moviegoers will give it a standing ovation.
The whole movie can be summarized as follows: a trio of criminals are on the run for something they have done. They steal a car they purely accidentally come across , while rolling over across the screen with their getaway car , somewhere in the-middle-of-nowhere. The owner of this car is not pleased with that and sets off in pursuit because there's something precious for him in that car. And along the way he picks up one of the abandoned brother. That's it! The rest you can complete as you please using your own imagination because you don't get much information about where, why and how this whole situation developed in this art-house film.
The opening scene with the three gangsters in the car drifting along the road and arguing the whole time, has a very high "Pulp Fiction" feeling. The part in which you see Eric (Guy Pearce) awakening / getting sober / coming to his senses (use your imagination) and after wards stumbling into a sort of boiling hot metal silo that looks like a karaoke bar because of the extremely loud oriental music, can be compared with a scene out of a spaghetti western with a gunslinger who stumbles into a town in the middle of a godforsaken desert under the red-hot Nevada sun. These two interwoven sequences with the brilliant sequence of images of an in slow motion crashing getaway car, is perfection itself. It looked so promising. But the expectations were not fulfilled. Ultimately it's just a typical road movie in dusty arid Australia.
How did things get to this stage and what caused this community to become a totally wild, lawless and dog eating Australian civilization ? That's something you can only guess. You only get the puzzling message "Ten Years after the collapse" at the beginning. What collapse do they mean? Is it about an economic collapse after which the Australian dollars became totally worthless. That could be the reason why everybody is always asking for American dollars. You could also assume that the immune system has collapsed. Because to be honest it's a bunch of freaks you are confronted with. At times I had the impression that Eric and Rey were a kind of mutated zombies, because they were highly resistant to the impact of bullets from automatic rifles.
The entire film is drenched in the hopelessness of the survivors and the stark hostility that prevails there. The situation is similar to the dusty Wild West. Also taking the law into their own hands. This makes for some gruesome scenes of gratuitous violence and explicit aggressive shocking images. Michôd is not really interested in telling a linear, clear story in "The Rover" but rather likes to exhibit an artistic set of images in this film. The purpose of the pursuit by Eric remains unclear until the end. Eric himself is not exactly an open book and keeps his motives hidden, using his gruff and closed nature. By the way, this is a magnificent performance by Guy Pearce, who I can still remember as Mike from "Neighbours" long time ago when this soap ran on television. I've never noticed him in another movie. But I'm sure there are a lot of films he played in I never saw till now. I didn't recognize him with that scraggly beard and his tired, almost suicidal attitude. Robert Pattinson also excels as the slightly deranged Rey who always started telling some unintelligible and unimportant story on the most inconvenient moments. In short, grandiose renditions.
What intrigued me in this film was the soundtrack. An eerie and mysterious sound used as an underlay. A cacophony of all sorts of exotic sounds, including a didgeridoo I think. A wonderful addition to the sometimes hallucinatory images which made it even more chilling.
A fairly quirky film with images used as art. Sensitive and brilliant performances. And an excellent soundtrack. But ultimately there remains a fairly superficial and boring storyline. For me it was a bit too "arty" and too difficult to fathom. I read somewhere, "A person who sits brainless in front of the screen, just sees a man on a devastating journey throughout a desert landscape." I certainly wasn't watching it brainless, but eventually that's also the only thing I saw ....
"I have a bomb and a Pakistani kid, so I'm sure you can appreciate where we'll have to go with this"
"Torn" manages to shake off the label "TV Movie", thanks to the wonderful performances of the two female protagonists Mahnoor Baloch (Maryam) and Dendrie Taylor (Lea), two mothers who slowly grow closer to each other and support each other in their grief after the loss of their two sons, Walter and Eddie. The two teenage boys were killed in a blast that took place in a shopping mall. In the first place the explosion was due to a gas leak. Afterwards the accusations start which leads to resentment, anger and blaming each other. The film title can be interpreted in different ways. Is it about the wrenching feelings of sadness ? Or is it about the breaking up of an accidentally formed friendship ? Or is it about the torn bodies of the victims after the bombing?
Their friendship was put to a test by the fact that the alleged gas leak apparently wasn't the cause of the explosion. An FBI investigation was started because there were indications that it could be a terrorist attack. First Walter could be the culprit. On the one hand his Muslim Pakistani origin and on the other hand an incident where he fought with some other students after they used some racist statements, made sure he was placed on the list of suspects. The fact that his father Ali (Faran Tahir), was suspected as an accomplice in the attacks on the Twin Towers (this was refuted afterwards) is an additional factor. Eddie also appears to be one of the suspects since he expressed death threats against some students who bullied him all the time. After the bombing, the group of bullies was severely decimated, so Eddie came in sight of the FBI.
"Torn" is not a spectacle. Don't expect spectacular action moments with devastating explosions and victims flying around with severed limbs as a result. It's rather the explosive interaction between two cultures and the subtle way the racism and prejudices are shown. "Torn" manages to cram the tense issues like bullying among youth, racism and terrorism in a single film without using visual masterpieces. But although this was omitted, it remains a 80-minute short film which is interesting and fascinating to watch. Also it shows how the media in an indiscriminate manner draws conclusions and the resulting publications are the cause that the personal lives of individuals are ruined.
As mentioned before, the biggest part of acting is seized by the two female actresses. Mahnoor Balach is a Pakistani beauty with an engaging personality who charms you while performing on the screen. A gentle person with an endearing English with that well-known Pakistani accent. Dendrie Taylor didn't really rang a bell. Yet I had recently seen her twice in another movie without knowing it. She was Degroat's date in "Out of the furnace" and Lillian Disney in "Saving Mr. Banks". I really couldn't recognize her in this last movie. In this film she just needs to show her face which is loaded with emotions. It speaks volumes. The face of a single woman working as a cleaning-lady in the evenings, probably a poorly paid job, who must provide for the education of her teenage son. A hardworking woman who apparently isn't on good terms with her ex who doesn't bother about his son's education.
So the focus is on the relationship between these two women and the way they deal with their grief and loss, the breach of confidence that develops and eventually the growing back to each other. It has also a wonderful closures which is an indictment against the phenomenon of "prejudice" and once again proves that not everything is as it seems. A film that fits perfectly with the movie "The Citizen" that raises the same problems. "Torn" is a film with two beautiful interpretations. A film with an intensely emotional topic without turning into a corny tearjerker.
"What do we do now? I don't know. We've never gotten this far."
Frankly, thus far I am very disappointed about the movies I was looking forward to for so long. In "Godzilla" the infamous monster was totally absent, "Transcendence" was too ordinary and meaningless, "Divergent" was just another SF Fantasy tale for teenage girls, "300 Rise of an Empire" was just like "300", "The Expendables 3" looked exhausted and are in need of a replacement and "Pompeii" was a storm in a teacup. Only "Robocop", "Guardians of the Galaxy","Maleficent" and "Captain America: Winter Soldier" could surprise and enchant me. I wasn't expecting much from "Edge of Tomorrow". Partly due to the fact that Mr. Cruise probably would be shining on the screen again the way he always does. That's what I thought! What a big mistake that was. For me "Edge of Tomorrow", a film based on the Japanese comic book "All you need is kill" by Hiroshi Sakurazaka, is already THE summer blockbuster.
Imagine an invasion on a vast coastline in France as in "Saving Privat Ryan," but this time in a more futuristic perspective. High-tech helicopters flying through the sky and dropping "Robocop"-like soldiers on the beach, who immediately start a massive battle against fierce aliens, called Mimics, who look as if they appeared in "The Matrix". You get an adrenaline boost while watching this battlefield with advancing forces being massacred. And in between is a pity looking Colonel Cage (Tom Cruise) who in an inexplicable way got promoted from Colonel to an ordinary soldier with an indelible stain. He turns out to be a deserter, so to speak. He gets an ultra modern combat equipment and he's ordered to be part of the first platoon which will lead the invasion and will throw itself in the middle of this bloody war. Ironically, he has no idea how to turn off the safety of his Japanese speaking equipment, and so he's killed almost instantly. Due to circumstances however, he ends up in a sort of time-cycle like Bill Murray experienced in "Groundhog Day". He goes back in time again and again to the moment when he wakes up at the base from where the invasion is coordinated.
Only some questions remained. Why exactly was it that particular point in time ? Was it Bill Cage who determined this ? Maybe I've overlooked the answer or I misunderstood something. But don't let this spoil the fun because it's a fascinating, action-packed, exciting and sometimes humorous stunner of a movie. Even the presence of Cruise didn't bother me. Normally Cruise is such an actor who has such an ego and pretentiousness that the screen is filled with his personality anyway. This was better than expected. Even his room wide dazzling smile shrank perceptibly. And to be honest, this film is fun for all moviegoers. Those who can't stand Cruise may rejoice about the fact that Cruise gets exterminated numerous times. Those who idolize Cruise can be thrilled because he comes back to live over and over again so he can restart the mission as a true hero.
Doug Liman created a heart-pounding raging SF. It's something like "The Bourne Identity". A successful concept and probably because of the extremely devious put together script. Despite the fact that the same event is repeated a few times, this isn't really disturbing, because Bill Cage attempts to tackle the situation each time in a different way. And this leads sometimes to hilarious moments.
As said before, the rather timid Tom Cruise played an enjoyable role as Colonel Cage. But the moment Emily Blunt appears on the scene as Rita Vrataski, "The Angel of Verdun", everything speeds up and the interactions and fragments become humorous and entertaining. She's the perfect choice as the fierce female soldier who's also extremely attractive at the same time. I remembered the days when I sat at home before my monitor for hours struggling with an extremely difficult mission in "Call of Duty". Frustrated I always started over again trying in a different way till I succeeded to fight my way through it. The same principle is used in "Edge of Tomorrow". Also, there were two noteworthy supporting roles. Brendan Gleeson played the ruthless General Brigham and you can see Bill Paxton in a very amusing role as the drill sergeant Farell.
It's obvious I'm really enthusiastic about this movie and had a great time watching this highly entertaining movie. It's certainly a candidate for the title of "Best action movie" of the year 2014. The other candidate competing for this title is for me "Captain America: Winter Soldier". And right now it's a tie. Despite the end being a bit illogical, this SF is highly recommended. A lot of action packed scenes in a furious pace. A dazzling spectacle with some contagious humor and surprising plot twists. Fortunately a corny romance was omitted. And finally, Tom Cruise effacing himself in relation to the whole picture. All this makes this film a must-see. And I'm going to do something I rarely do: I'm going to re-watch it !
"Some things, once you've loved them, become yours forever. And if you try to let them go... They only circle back and return to you. They become part of who you are...
...or they destroy you."
After watching a few blockbusters I always get the urge to put on a not so commercial film. The title of this one combined with the fact that I'm not a real expert in literature, made sure that my expectations about "Kill your darlings" were totally misjudged. The phrase "Kill your darlings" is used in literary circles and is a maxim for writers and poets to delete favorite wordings, adjectives or phrases so that their writings become tighter and not defiled with unnecessary ballast. So you can expect to hear a lot of intellectual posturing in this film. It's actually a biographical drama about the origins of the "beat generation" in America and the young adults who support this : Allen Ginsburg, Jack Kerouac and William Burroughs. All of them became renowned writers and poets after wards.
I also was an avid bookworm in the past and I devoured innumerable books. I wasn't a fan of the literature with a capital L, but rather took pleasure in reading books written by Jack Vance, Raymond Elias Feist, Terry Pratchett, Terry Goodkind and Koontz among others. Not exactly literary heavyweights but masters of the fantasy and SF genre. My intellectual level probably wasn't of such a nature that I could appreciate magical realism, expressionism or neo-romanticism. Just as modern art, I think it means, describing the most trivial objects in such way, that they become fascinating objects. At one stage Allen, William and Lucien shred some books from great writers in pieces, and text fragments are nailed to the wall so they can form a coherent whole. A creation of literature out of chaos as it were. However I can empathize with the mood of the characters involved. I myself was also such a rebel once and didn't have the attitude of walking within the lines. Ultimately, you can see these beatniks as early forerunners of an anarchist movement in literature. Kicking the standardized writers who abide all elitist rules and styles in the shins.
The film is set in the aftermath of the 2nd World War, which is reflected in the whole atmosphere : the decor, the props, the music and the zeitgeist. This is also the most successful item in this film directed by John Krokidas. His first feature film he surely can be proud of and in which he succeeds in portraying the feeling of that time. You are witnessing the tipping point in the prudish American society where the youth of that time was looking for new trends and creative outlets. This manifested itself in dank little pubs where they played jazz, pseudo intellectual gatherings where gallons of alcohol was being consumed, experimenting with all kinds of mind-altering drugs and scanning the sexual boundaries and tolerances in this area.
The performances were all sublime. Dane DeHaan as the extrovert and intellectual Lucien Carr, the pivotal figure in this whole drama, who does look like a gay, blue-eyed blonde charmer, but reflects a genuine uncertainty about his sexual orientation. Michael "Dexter" Hall, who recently starred in "Cold in July", plays a homosexual stalker who sinks to the bottom of some pond in the beginning of the film. Jack Huston as Jack Kerouac. Ben Foster as William Burroughs. An intellectual who comes from a wealthy family, who's constantly experimenting with all sorts of drugs and therefore speaks in slow motion with a deep, rough voice the entire movie. And Daniel "Harry" Radcliffe as Allen Ginsberg. Radcliffe really does some effort to finally wipe that "Potter" stamp away. I have to admit that he plays in this film with very different magic wands. And yet I admire him for not giving in and choosing the obvious roles. After his not so bad performance in "The woman in black" he's now trying a more serious role with some fairly bold homosexual scenes. I'm still wondering about his sexual orientation now. The passion he shows while kissing his male opponents speaks volumes. And despite his efforts, once and a while that "Harry Potter"-smile that made him famous, appears again. After he sees the act of Carr in the school library you can admire that boyish roguish smile. The only thing missing is that twinkle in his eyes. Not a bad performance, but at times it was really superficial and it seemed more like a Shakespearean tragedy.
A difficult film. And despite its boring subject, it continued to fascinate me. A crime drama without that much drama. A passion that leads to a crime, but it's certainly not the emphasis. It's rather a film full of philosophical musings and constant literary debating by those who'll be the greatest in literature. All this with a solid bottle of wine and glass of whiskey after a hearty sniff of nitrous oxide. At times I also wished I had that in reach so this film would be more light-hearted. But still, respect for Radcliffe.
"Whatever happens tomorrow, you must promise me one thing. That you will stay who you are, not a perfect soldier, but a good man."
Since 2000 we are literally flooded with film versions of Marvel heroes. Just a small list: X-Men, Blade, Spider Man, Daredevil, The Hulk, The Punisher, Elektra, Fantastic Four, Ghost Rider, Iron Man, Thor, Wolverine, The Avengers, Guardians of the Galaxy ... Pretty impressive. And this year there's the release of "Captain America: Winter Soldier" of which I read so many good things everywhere. In preparation for this, I had to watch the first film from "Captain America" so I'll be proper prepared.
Captain America was introduced before World War II by Marvel and was immensely popular among the American troops. That's because he fought against the Nazis, the Japanese and other enemies of the U.S. After the 2nd World War he fought against communists during the Cold War. After that he sank into oblivion but was summoned back to join "The Avengers". Unlike other Marvel superheroes he doesn't have any super powers. He just has those immense muscles to defend himself with.
This movie takes place in 1942. Steve Rogers (Chris Evans) wants to join the army at all costs, to participate in defeating the Nazi regime in Europe. He is far too petite and has a whole catalog of illnesses. He is rejected while his good friend James "Bucky" Barnes (Sebastian Stan) is approved and about to leave to the front. At an exhibition Rogers attracts the attention of a certain Professor Erskine (Stanley Tucci) who makes him an offer: joining the secret project "Rebirth" where he'll receive injections and radiations with "Vita"-rays which will stabilize and activate the injected chemicals. His physical appearance changes quite dramatically. That thin, weak little boy changes into a healthy and muscular super soldier. Erskine has chosen him because he's sure that a weak person will continue to respect this gift and still will show compassion. "Because the strong man who has known power all his life, May lose respect for That power, but a weak man knows the value of strength, and knows ... compassion." But Steve Rogers is the only super soldier that mankind will know because professor Erskine is assassinated and thus the experiment can no longer be repeated.
The first half hour was funny and entertaining. The atmosphere of the 40's was beautiful integrated. A little bit sallow and with that 40's flair achieved by the costumes and decor. It really had that feeling of a pre-war film. The illusion they created seeing Chris Evans transforming from a toddler to an impressive person is wonderfully realized. Tommy Lee Jones (as the drill sergeant) and Tucci take care of some funny moments. Even the part where Captain America is used as a living billboard to attract new cannon fodder for the ongoing war, was reasonably entertaining. And then everything starts to look a bit ordinary and Captain America becomes a parody of itself. The transformation of a schmuck into an invincible someone is obviously something the audience loves to see, but the bland and cartooned second part puts a damper on that grandiose beginning.
The fight against the Nazi Johan Schmidt (Hugo Weaving) or Red Skull, who's in possession of some sort of cube from Odin (crucial in "The Avengers") which contains a super power that he wants to use to put the entire Nazi regime aside and conquer the world with, is initially enjoyable but eventually decays into a lousy action-movie. I thought it was a poor and incoherent story filled with asinine coincidences. The revue Captain America performs in, happens to move to Italy. Turns out his good friend "Bucky" is kidnapped by Red Skull and sits in the castle that the latter has taken over, to expand his organization "Hydra" and provide them with devastating weapons which work with the occult forces of the captured cube. But despite that almost invincible power, it really is a piece of cake for Captain America to sweep them together on a pile. He waltzes through it as if he is faced with an army of garden gnomes who are trying to defend themselves with tiny weapons. This really looked rather simplistic. One moment Red Skull inspects his troops and before you know it he's evacuating the castle in a panic, because Captain America came knocking on a door and a German porter on duty became acquainted with his legendary shield. The credibility of the story at that time was like the person Rogers was before he got those chemicals : weak, poor and meager. You can't call it exciting actually. And it's as predictable as the fact that Easter Monday will be this year again on a Monday.
The performances on the other hand are of an acceptable level. Chris Evans is superb as Captain America. The transformation of an insignificant schmuck into a savior and example of braveness for the American people, is simply sublime. Unfortunately his character eventually evolves into a third-rate action figure with an uninspired storyline. Tommy Lee Jones was again irresistible in a role that suits him. A humorless, moody loudmouth with a strong opinion and someone who says his unvarnished opinion. Hugo Weaving was perfect for the role as the dictatorial Nazi Schmidt and archenemy Red Skull. His grim facial features and demagogic madness made me forget to get irritated by his English with an exaggerated German accent.
But despite the fine performances, this Captain America was no more than an average action movie. No suspense and totally not impressive. Visually it didn't look that bad but the story was of a questionable level. Ultimately, it's only an introduction to the film "The Avengers." The only thing I could think of was "I hope the sequel isn't such a dull spectacle as this .....".
PS. However, I can tell you that the sequel is fantastic ...
"It's Bianca. She's got a brother.
He's in town, says he has what we've been looking for. He's out of control, Mike.
You told me Bianca was not a problem anymore. Bianca isn't a problem anymore. I'm afraid that's his problem."
Those who imagine the Los Angeles metropolis to be idealistically beautiful, they should adjust that view after watching "Message from the King". The less beautiful part of Los Angeles is used here. An impoverished neighborhood where the vast majority of residents live in poverty and where crime and drugs are an obvious part of society. Ash gray ghettos full of human suffering. And that's being emphasized by drizzly weather. The crowded mortuary is a reflection of these fading slums. A collection of nobodies who died because of an overdose, madness (drowned in a bathtub as an imaginary fish) and gang violence.
This is what Jacob King (Chadwick Boseman) faces when he arrives in L.A. The reason why he's staying in the city of angels is the sudden disappearance of his younger sister Bianca (Sibongile Mlambo). Soon he discovers the sore situation his sister got herself into and what it did to her : she earned a spot in the mortuary with a name tag on her big toe. The search for the murderers of his younger sister brings him in touch with all kind of figures. Trish (Natalie Martinez) the loyal neighbor points him in the right direction after which he meets a violent gang of Balkan criminals run by a certain Zico (Lucan Melkonian). Then there's the rich dentist Wentworth (Luke Evans) and the wealthy movie producer Preston (Alfred Molina). And let me tell you. Some of them are getting to know the bicycle chain he just bought, in a less pleasant way.
For Jacob, these L.A. neighborhoods probably still look like charming neighborhoods compared to where he comes from. His sister Bianca, his deceased brother Isaac and Jacob himself, lived the largest part of their life in South Africa in the Cape Flat townships, a sandy area south of Cape Town and better known as "Apartheid's dumping ground". A dilapidated community where gangs rule. Both in the slums and in prison. Such as "The Number Gangs". Isaac was a member of this notorious gang, until his death. Reason enough for Bianca to turn her back on her home country and to seek salvation in the United States.
You could say this movie is a cheaper version of "The Equalizer" with Boseman having an equal personality as Denzel Washington. A cold-blooded but alert person who has control over his violent eruptions and who accurately follows the traces to solve the criminal puzzle in the end. However, the ultimate motive remains quite mysterious. Perhaps the only minus I could find in this hard-core, ultra-dark movie. In fact, it's an ordinary revenge film that differs slightly from others because of its quirky atmosphere and tone. And afterwards I discovered the film was directed by a fellow countryman : Fabrice du Welz. Maybe that's why this movie displays a kind of willfulness.
Even though this action-flick is soaked by cliché elements (corrupt policemen, a cunning politician and a prostitute (Teresa "Lights Out" Palmer) who plays the Good Samaritan), you can speak of a stylish end product. No explicit violence scenes (the result is usually more explicit than the action itself) and a few star-like interpretations like that of Teresa Palmer. But especially Chadwick Boseman impressed. A man with few words, but hard negotiating techniques. From the very first instance, I was fascinated by him. In my opinion, this is yet again a rough diamond that simmers on Netflix undiscovered. Don't let anybody stop you from watching this when you bump into it somewhere, because this will surely surprise you.
“I got a girl for you. A blond girl from my dance class.
Slightly chubby. But when you start to move, all that is worth it.
That big woman can make you move like a hurricane”
Are you a sucker for romantic comedies? Or movies where everything goes wrong and in the end the whole situation miraculously falls into place? Or a film in which a rather geeky-looking daughter suddenly transforms into a fairy-like lady, after which some sad sack who at first didn’t have any interest, suddenly starts chasing her with his slobbering tongue to the floor? Or such a nonsense comedy with really lame jokes ? Even summarized they barely manage to conjure a smile on your face. Or are you looking forward to that particular film where again there’s someone in it with the name Dick, and you already know in advance what roguish jokes are about to be made? Hallelujah! Then “Blended” really is a movie that fits you because it includes all these features and you’ll save some time. No need to look for all the specific movies and see them all, because they (the geniuses) put everything in this movie. Brilliant.
Adam Sandler. Yes, popular in America. However, he’s not on my list of favorite comedians. I always feel as if he is reluctant to act and then makes up some insipid one-liners to satisfy everyone. A little smile here and there happens occasionally. But tears from laughing while watching a Sandler’s movie is nonexistent. I even think that a night of watching Sandler-movies could have a disastrous medical affect on me. Chronic diarrhea or a fit of hysterics …
“Blended” is such a predictable feel-good movie where two single people meet each other, can’t stand each other and find each other in the end, so everybody can fall in each others arms. A happy ending with a capital “H”. The chemistry between the two is absent at the beginning. Of course this is caused by a series of misunderstandings as you’ll notice afterwards. By a twist of fate (Dick turns out to have a lot of kids. Did you notice the subtle association between this fact and his first name ?) they both go on a trip to South Africa for a restful holiday with the whole family. That’s the first positive thing I can say about this movie. The images of this adventurous and primitive Africa are gorgeous. The African Savannah with its wildlife and its beautiful sunsets. But for such images I can turn on the TV and watch something like National Geographics.
To their surprise they bump into each other of course. They are required to share the same suite and also have diner together at the same table. Obviously at that table sits a typical couple that always appears in this type of film: one, probably divorced, noisy guy of mature age accompanied by a young wench with a bosom where there’s enough space for a few flower pots and therefore the need of a balcony is superfluous at the apartment. Of course these two attachments shake around a lot and is a joy for one of the two sons who’s in the “nude-magazines-under-the-bed” phase. And then we are ready for a series of embarrassing situations, childish fart jokes, endearing cuddles with cute teenage girls, the required human emotional bonding that develop gradually and a happy ending where everything falls into the fold.
The most annoying item in this film: the appearance of the African crooner Nickens all the time. Especially the one during the basketball game was really an embarrassment. They look like a bunch of Muppets, who pop up whether relevant or not and start singing a song related to the situation. I would have tied them to an elephant, cram a huge rocket in the butt of the elephant, light it real fast so it’ll disappear soon into the bush with that tricked orchestra.
Most positive thing in the whole movie: the appearance of Drew Barrymore. She acts as if it’s self-evident and looks so charming all the time. Not everybody is blessed with those qualities. She still has that sweet face like she had in “ET“. And I have to admit that Sandler and her make a cute couple.
I can be brief about Adam Sandler. He’s an imitation of himself. He plays the same character role in all his films over and over again : a clumsy pathetic guy who sounds sometimes boorish, but ultimately his dry humor and his seemingly fragile personality manages to please members of the female sex. A repetition in other words. And that’s something that is invariably misused in this film: endlessly repeating the same lame joke (bumping an innocent head, mispronouncing Sandler’s name …) until you want to scream to the screen “Yeaaaaah, we get it … ! “.
“Lose not the Queen, for ten to one… if she be lost, the game is gone.”
“Wicked Blood” is a standard mafia movie, but then on a smaller scale. The story of the teenage girl Hannah (Abigail Breslin) who’s being taken care of, after the loss of her parents, by her uncle Donny (Lew Temple), which has the appearance of Dr. Emmett Brown from “Back to the Future” but with too much “hillbilly crack” in his system. And then there’s also Uncle Frank (Sean Bean). Frank is the local bad guy and head of a mini gang of mobsters. Besides running a striptease tent he also has a lucrative business as manufacturer and supplier of crack. The one who assists him throughout the film is his somewhat crazy, retarded younger brother Bobby (Jake Busey). Apparently Bobby became slower after Hannah’s mother bashed his head with a baseball bat.
Hannah is a passionate chess player (something she probably inherited from Donny who once was State Champion) and she applies the rules of this game in her daily life. Thoughtful and with reason she performs every next move. Eventually, she devises a sophisticated plan to escape from this violent, drug-related world. Throw in an undercover agent, an assault on Hannah’s sister and the final revenge, and you have a complete picture of this standard crime film. A film with a story like there are already a thousand made of.
And yet it’s not an unpleasant film. And that’s thanks to Abigail Breslin who manages to give shape to the character Hannah in a natural and wonderful way. She reminded me of Saoirse Ronan repeatedly. She also has that innocent look, that determination and the all-pervading calmness. Maybe Ronan outclasses her a bit but only with a small lead. Despite the fact that the whole story is a bit exaggerated, improbable at times and thinking about it afterwards sometimes pretty laughable, the acting of Abigail Breslin was very convincing and plausible. A small, young girl only skilled in chess who goes to battle against a bunch of ruthless drug gangsters, who are not shy to liquidate someone who complains to much, is something that only could happen to Nancy Drew.
The one I enjoyed the most, was Lew Temple as the crazy, drug addicted low-life Donny. The chess games with Hannah briefly hinted a different picture of him though. That of a reasonably intelligent man who, because of past events and the current situation he is experiencing, recreated the individual as we see it now. The moments when he takes a shot (probably to check the quality) and starts to thrash about, accompanied by loud rock music, I found grandiose.
Sean Bean (Who I’ve recently saw in “CleanSkin“) looks like Boromir teleported into modern times. The same faraway look and stoic calmness he constantly shows. I expected him declaring a sentence like “One does not simply … steal my drugs” any moment.
Despite the mediocre storyline and some irritating (The city where it all takes place is apparently so deserted and desolate as a ghost town along Route 66. Totally no inhabitants to detect) and hilarious (The FBI infiltrating such a crappy,small gang.) moments, it’s still a movie you continue to watch. And that is merely due to the solid commitment of the actors and actresses.
“Nature has an order. A power to restore balance. I believe he is that power.”
Now this was a movie I was looking forward for so long already. This should have been a mega-movie that would beat the 1998 version in every way, with one’s hand tied behind one’s back. The 1998 “Godzilla” was for me a bit of a setback with a cardboard monster, terrible humorless acting and a “Jurassic Park” type of ending. With current technology, it should be possible to create a grandiose visual spectacle. But what a terrible disappointment it was eventually.
The first thing that flashed through my mind was that they could just as well have used the title “A tiny bit of Godzilla“. You’ll see the monster of monsters approximately 15 minutes. I have read here and there some arguments from Godzilla-hardcore enthusiasts that the movie remained faithful to the original Godzilla films and that the absence of the monster contributes to the build-up of tension. I hope they won’t generalize this technique in future films. Imagine the new “Tarzan” movie where you stare for half an hour at the adventures of Cheetah and finally Tarzan shows up the last 10 minutes to save the day. Or the new Spiderman. A crook destroys an American metropolis the entire movie, and Spidey just takes care of that the last 10 minutes. Or imagine “Jaws” made like this! After one and a half hour looking at a fin cutting through the seawater, the shark finally appears at the end and gets blown into smithereens. Exciting?
Not exactly. It’s more a “Santa-Clause” excitement that children experience. For them it’s also just waiting until that imaginary figure finally reappears in their country.
I admit,”Godzilla” is a film icon with a very rich history that I know little about. I didn’t know that this was already the 30th official movie. I only saw the 1998 version and a slightly older version of “King Kong Vs. Godzilla“. It’s still amazing how popular this creation has become. Godzilla has been around since 1954. A creature from the ocean that got such monstrous dimensions because of radioactive radiations. It was a resounding success and the “Showa“, “Heisei” and “Millenium” series were produced between 1954 and 2004 by Toho. The two American versions were both made under the watchful eye of Toho making sure that the rules of a Godzilla film were properly applied : part of the film must take place in Japan, Godzilla never kills people and it won’t die.
However, “Godzilla” better had followed a diet before showing itself. It looks ponderous and fat. Admittedly, it’s a lot better than the version in which a person plays it in a latex suit. But apparently the iconic monster really feasted on fat whales since his last appearance. Perhaps that’s the reason of his meager 15 minutes appearance. The burden of obesity, perhaps. That is the first frustration. The short screenplay that Godzilla gets. And that for the star player the movie is named after. And the moment it comes in the picture, it doesn’t get the full attention and has to share the spotlight with two other prehistoric giants. And there is annoyance number two. Those two look terribly bad. Almost like two metal monstrosities. But the sound they produce is seriously frightening and imaginative. This could be a personal touch by Gareth Edwards who gave in “Monsters” (as far as I can remember) the aliens also such a unique sound.
But my biggest frustration was that the entire film was covered in complete darkness and shades. I suppose the prehistoric monsters aren’t fond of sunshine (probably they are afraid to get extinct again) and therefore act when the sun goes down, and preferably when the rain is pouring down from the sky (The 1998 film had the same phenomenon). The entire film is shrouded in fog, dust and smoke. It’s sometimes really hard to distinguish something. The only bright moments were during human interactions. And that part of the movie was the most positive. The human aspect was of an acceptable level and proves the emphasis is on this and not on the creatures fighting each other.
Both Bryan Cranston (Joe Brody) as Aaron Taylor-Johnson (Ford Brody) did some brilliant acting. Joe is the desperate engineer who lost his wife in the past during a disaster at the nuclear power plant in Janjira. After enigmatic seismic activity the plant collapsed completely. 15 Years later Joe is still looking for the cause of this catastrophe. His son Ford, however, has put this behind him, lives in San Francisco and is an explosive expert in the U.S. army. His relationship with his father is at a low ebb. The father-son story with the known mutual blaming, isn’t really soggy and overdramatized, but shown in a convincing way. Also Ken Watanabe (Dr. Serizawa Ishiro) was the right man for the role of expert in the field of these prehistoric monsters. David Strathairn had to do the ungrateful part of the commanding Admiral. There’s always such a character in these kinds of movies : a pedantic military who always does what he thinks is best, regardless of the recommendations of the experts, until things really go wrong and then crawls back with his tail between his legs, begging for help.
The acting wasn’t bad. The action part was sufficiently present. And the special effects looked really splendid at times (if they were visible through the smoke and clouds). The main thing missing was the tension” (not the “Santa-Claus” tension). And what was too much present in here? Nonsensical actions and decisions. Why didn’t Joe empty his automatic rifle on the soft part of the MUTO? I would have done it. Twice there was an unlikely reunion amidst an immense crowd. And the fragment of the enormous bunker where nuclear waste was stored, was completely ridiculous! Of course nobody saw the huge crater behind the metal door …
For moviegoers who expect a movie with a gang of monsters bashing eachother brains, with clear images and nerve-racking tension, it’ll be a real setback. The Godzilla fans, who applause the “delayed appearing” and interpret it as tension, will surely enjoy it. I’m a little bit in between and still very disappointed. This new version isn’t what I expected, namely better than the 1998 version. Ultimately, it is just the same.
Fortunately, Godzilla is not that vengeful after all those nuclear bombs that they used against him in the past. He left San Francisco as a bull in a china shop and was kind enough not to damage Frisco more. Respect!
"I need a drink and I haven't even had my coffee yet."
Imagine. Your wife wakes you up in the middle of the night because she heard a suspicious noise. You get up and with trembling knees and a giant easter egg in your pants, you move along with a mega-gun in your shaking fist. And there's actually a burglar waving a flashlight in the middle of your living room. And in that very tense moment the antique grandmother-clock chimes. You scare and "BANG" the revolver goes off. The burglar will never have the urge again to go and buy cigarettes at the local supermarket. In other words, the brains he possessed aren't anymore where they should be. They have spread all over your living room. Obviously, this is seen as self-defense, and while the funeral is held, you are secretly watching while the victim is buried. Suddenly a dead-calm stranger stands next to you. He appears to be the father (and also ex-con) of the now brainless kid. In plain wording he lets you know he's not exactly happy with the death of his son. And before you know it, you are in a threatening situation in which your son is the main target. The following events however ensure that you end up in a bizarre situation and you're drawn into a death ride that defies all imagination.
And that's what happens to Richard Dane (Michael C. Hall) in this rather exciting and surprising movie. You can expect an exciting start compared to "Cape Fear". And when you've seen the end, you really believe that Jim Mickle got lessons from Quentin Tarantino. It's a gray, depressive and intense thriller complete with drizzling rain and bad neighborhoods with abandoned houses and dilapidated American Cadillacs. A story that is sometimes brutal and sometimes completely absurd. At times I doubted whether it was supposed to be a gritty,terrible life sketch or a cynical absurd comedy. A wonderful low budget film that begins with revenge, but slowly sheds a light on something disturbing. Nothing seems to be what it is and there's always another twist in this ominous story.
"Cold in July" is a morbid movie with a real threatening mood, violence of excessive proportions and a sickening event that causes the final outburst of extreme aggression. It's an adaptation of the eponymous book written by Joe Lansdale, the famed horror/thriller author. Michael C. "Dexter" Hall plays the lead role as Richard, a friendly, timid family man who earns his living as a frame maker. Because of my lack of interest in TV series, I had no idea that Hall was reasonably known as "Dexter." My mother in law was astonished that I didn't know him. He doesn't have the look of a seasoned rugged macho. But that was already evident after the confrontation with the burglar. But Hall knows how to interpret the transformation into a ruthless avenger in an unprecedented way.
Sam Shepard plays the part of Russel, the revenge seeking father. It seems as if he played in every movie I've seen recently (Out of the furnace, Mud, Killing them Softly, Safe House) and he's ideally suited for this role. The gray, weathered face,that raw raspy voice and his tough stance. It fits perfectly with the person Russel. And yet he shows in the end that there's still a bit of humanity inside him.
But for me the appearance of Don Johnson was a real surprise. He's the one who truly excels in this movie. When I see Johnson, I see Crockett from Miami Vice. I didn't see him acting anymore until "Django Unchained." But when he drove up in his bright red convertible with the swaying Hawaiian girl on the dashboard and that juicy Texas accent, I was hooked. A brilliant rendition of a pig farmer aka private detective, who can defend himself and gives his full support to Russel.
Visually it's very convincing at times. The dialog-free fragments are sometimes perfectly portrayed: scrubbing the wall in the beginning or the moments when they sit on the porch at Don Johnson's place. "Cold in July" is a mixture of different genres. It tries to surprise you again and again . The fact that it was a bit unbelievable how Richard Dane evolves from a typical wimp into a bloodthirsty ruthless basher is a slight detail. This was a fantastic experience and a must see for all fans of a rich suspenseful thriller.
"This is not a disease! There is no cure! You have to kill to survive!"
The moment "Afflicted" began, I sighed and thought to myself : "Please not again such a terrible found footage movie ..." Usually they look like a documentary with dreadful amateurish movie clips It always seems as if it is filmed by some grandmother who forgot that she has to push the red button again so it will stop recording. Afterwards when viewing the film, it's a series of mundane and monotonous blurry images which sway around all the time. Not exactly something you can charm me with.
Of course there are exceptions in this genre. The mother of all found footage films "Cannibal Holocaust" received a cult status. It was (I think) a movie that used this new element for the first time. David Carter's quote is actually the explanation of the principle: "The viewer feels as if they are there with the crew, experiencing the horrors with them". "The Blair Witch Project" led to the revival of this genre and became infamous (although that status was achieved because of the hype at that time about whether or not the images were authentic). "Cloverfield" and seemingly "Chronicle" are also memorable films. But unfortunately there are also terrible creations that only loyal supporters enchant like "The Dinosaur Project","The tapes","SX tapes","A night in the Woods "and "Evidence". It's a genre that I'm really not that fond about.
"The Afflicted" turned out to be quite a pleasant surprise for me. First the visuals weren't so bad and I didn't need to run for a pill of "Touristil" to counteract the upcoming seasickness. This is partly because Clif is a documentary filmmaker and uses a sophisticated film equipment. This looks all professional and that makes that the filming is of an exceptional quality. So no garden-and-kitchen camcorder was used, mostly resulting in terribly blurry and shaking images. And "First person shooter" fans know the camera position used. So if you regularly do a bit of fragging in "Call of Duty", "Halo" or "Far Cry", then you'll appreciate this footage.
In addition, a time-honored horror legend revived again in a fresh and sometimes humorous way. The first 30 minutes are not really exciting. And you can't speak of very spectacular acting. It seemed like a travelogue made by Derek (Derek Lee) and Clif (Clif Prowse), after they left on a world trip. Atmospheric images and beautiful panoramic views were edited in a rather wonderful way. Especially the images of "Cinque Terre" and "La Spezia" looked as if they came straight out of a promotional video of a travel agency. It's waiting for the beginning of the suspense. That's the thing you are waiting for eventually. And when you're a seasoned horror fan, then it must be something very special before it provides some excitement. Well the moment Derek starts getting the symptoms that indicates that something is not right, it became fascinating. A unique approach to the phenomenon Derek is suffering from. It's done in a humorous way (experimenting with his sudden powers and especially looking for the right way to satisfy his hunger was sublime) and sometimes in a scary way (the transformation, the pulsating veins all over his body, the threatening animal sounds and the way of moving). I realized that it wouldn't be a typical horror movie involving some paranormal activity, a gang of zombies, a pandemic caused by a virus or an old-fashioned ghost story. I think it's a creditable performance by the makers, to achieve this movie with the limited resources they had.
Conclusion: The beginning felt rather forced, but when Derek's mutations manifest (and I anxiously try not to give any spoilers away), a raw and frenzy story starts. Personally, I think it's a film that brings both the found-footage genre as the most ancient horror subject ever, to a higher level. The brilliant camera technique ensures that this low-budget horror looked outstanding. A driven, bloodthirsty and creepy horror in which seemingly a new superhero was created. It started as something funny and as a joke to splice a rock with bare fists, but soon it degenerated into a nightmare. For fans of the genre this is a "must see" and it is definitely a successful experiment in the "low-budget" section.
"My father always said to only regret the things you didn't do not the things you did."
"All good things" is a beautiful love story that slowly turns into a psychological drama and ends up as a mystery. A mystery that remains unsolved and ultimately has an open end as big as the Grand Canyon. It's based on true facts and reconstructed according to court documents. In reality, it was about Kathleen Durst, who's to this day still registered as a missing person. She was married to Robert Durst, son of a real estate mogul in New York. On January 31, 1982, the 29-year-old student from Manhattan, New York disappeared. And now, after all these years, they made this movie in which the main characters are given the names Katie and David Marks.
They managed to cast two big names for this movie who depict the turbulent love life in a recognizable and convincing manner. Kirsten Dunst played an outstanding poignant role as the lovable Katie who falls for the charming David, played by Ryan Gosling. Personally, I'm not so impressed with Gosling's previous acting. I was afraid I had to look at a straight face again the whole movie. A face where not a shred of emotion is detectable. But that turned out better than I was hoping for and throughout the whole movie Gosling showed a true pallet of all sorts of human emotions: joy, love, sadness, fear, pain and anger. Compared to the two movies "Drive" and "Only God Forgives", Gosling had a load of text to remember. A great interpretation. In particular, the gradual transition from a charming young man into a tormented, aggressive and introverted person was a well played act.
Ditto for Kirsten Dunst. She charms you from the beginning with her lovely appearance and highly endearing smile. The desperation that she shows after a certain time and the intense grief she has when she realizes that there isn't a possibility to escape this nightmare, is a beautiful rendition. It certainly is a more subtle role than just playing the girlfriend of Spiderman.
"All good things" starts obviously with all the good things that are part of human life. Meeting someone for the first time, flirting and the intense feeling of love, thinking about the future, wedding plans ... Everything peppered with joy and love. Life can't go wrong anymore. And then the pink cloud turns into a dark gray rainy cloud. The moment Katie brings up the subject of having children, it's radically rejected by David. This is the reversal in the passionate relationship that existed between these two lovers. And before you know it the atmosphere is ruined and the ghosts from the past are haunting him again. David turns into a depressed, moody and aggressive person. The gap between the two is growing by the day. It goes from bad to worse and Katie begins to explore the possibilities of a divorce. And then she disappears ... And that is until now still the case. Unresolved.
The moment the story changes from a touching romantic and emotional movie into a thriller full of mystery, I lost focus. It was suddenly all very absurd and confusing. The chemistry between David and Katie and the built up tension was wonderful to see. But the part about the disappearance and subsequent the judicial investigation with scattered fragments, was fairly vague. The only thing made clear throughout the film was the heavy burden resting on David's shoulders. David withdrawing himself in anonymity because the finger was pointed at him soon after, I can understand. But the masquerade and dressing up as a woman, was a bit too much and unexplained. Ultimately, it's a movie without a clear answer. But It couldn't be otherwise, since that's how it was in reality. And eventually you end up with even more questions than when the movie started! Actually it's a film that belongs in the category of "TV movies about unsolved disappearances" as "The Lindbergh Kidnapping Case" with Anthony Hopkins. A banal movie you can watch again on a rainy Saturday night on a TV-channel.
“Bless your name, holy Jesus.
Satan’s sheddin’ big ol’ tears tonight.
He’s a big boy, ain’t he? I call him Satan, ’cause he’s so big and mean.
It’s these deadly serpents the Lord sent us to handle… without fear.
Our hearts are filled with the Holy Ghost.
Get on up here, Brother Cole. Satan wants to talk to you.”
“Holy Ghost People” isn’t really a horror, even if the movie poster looks like it and it’s a pretty macabre theme. It’s more a thriller in which the creepy part is manifested through the religious sphere. Or you get the shivers already by looking at some poisonous rattlesnakes.
What makes this movie eerie is the fact that it’s indeed still possible that an individual who’s charismatic and has the talent to preach in a convincing way, can manipulate a bunch of people so that they follow him blindly and firmly believe in what this indoctrinating figure proclaims. A person with a seemingly clear mind who tries to convince others that he’s talking the truth (however it’s usually a twisted truth). Regardless if what he’s preaching is based on Biblical or other religious texts or that this is simply improvised and full of hollow words. And he usually speaks to people who have physically and emotionally difficulties, or are recovering from a particular setback, and actually are in need and looking for a glimmer of hope and a last resort to hold on to. History has already shown the effect of such figures and what they can cause. And without going into a religious debacle here, I’m convinced that most of the global problems are rooted in the religious aspect of human life. And that’s something that scares a lot of people already. Enough said!
Holy Ghost People
Charlotte (Emma Greenwell) is an ordinary waitress in a local bar in a godforsaken American town near the Appalachians. She’s looking for her sister Liz who she has thrown out years ago because of a persistent drug addiction. The last thing she knows about Liz is that she has joined a cult called “The Church of the One Accord” somewhere in the mountains. She asks help from the Afghanistan veteran Wayne (Brendan McCarthy) who’s suffering from PTSD and has an alcohol problem and who she helped one night. At first he’s rather reluctant until Charlotte waves some dollar bills in front of his eyes. Before you know it they are attending a service with this religious group and they meet the phlegmatic and charismatic figure Billy (Joe Egender) who looks like he walked away from a 60s movie and you expect him to sing a rock song any moment. A true religious crooner. He emphasizes his message by using poisonous rattlesnakes. They are the symbol of the eternal struggle between God and the devil. Charlotte and Wayne soon realize that Liz is not present and Charlotte goes to investigate. Before they know it, however, they are caught in the web of the dangerous religious Brother Billy and his henchmen.
Holy Ghost People
Ultimately, this wasn’t bad movie in the beginning. The gloomy atmosphere was constantly present and even at times it was pretty exciting. The images mounted in between from the eponymous documentary made by Peter Adair in 1967, made sure that the lurid and creepy atmosphere was maintained. The performances are the strongest part of this movie. It’s the denouement that’s the weak point. Especially Joe Egender I thought was fantastic and did some strong acting. He really came across as an evil and manipulative person with his loud-sounding voice and the way he spoke to his followers in a hypnotic way. A true wolf in sheep’s clothing. Satan in person. Brendan McCarthy and Emma Greenwell were very convincing as the by chance created couple. McCarthy, ravaged by alcohol and who actually preferred to drive back. He’s a character who cares about nothing. Greenwell tries to unravel the puzzle on her own. They truly did their best in a convincing way.
Holy Ghost People
But then the movie turns into a complete mess and ends in a disappointing way. The entire buildup is fabulous and is negated by the uninspired denouement. Why couldn’t they just simply ask about the presence of Liz? Despite their aversion and indifference about that religious stuff, they still let themselves immerse. It also seemed strange to me that they could feel from the outset that there was a certain danger when staying in this closed community.
Holy Ghost People
In a certain way this was a scary and creepy movie about the deterrent of fanatical sects. A succession of extreme religious brainwashing where self-punishment is a method of self-purification. A crazy ritual encouraged by a dogmatic person. There are several films about such cults (and this one is definitely better than “Red State“). And because it is strange and incomprehensible for “normal” people this can lead to confusion and even fright, as the unknown frightens. So don’t expect gory scenes and ghastly moments. For genre fans, it’s a film that’s worth watching.
Comments 226 - 250 of 630
Movie comment on Meeting Evil
ikkegoemikke
“The question is, John, do you hate me more than you love your family.”
Weird, but despite all the negative opinions about this movie, I must confess that I thought it was a entertaining and ingeniously intertwined psychopathic film. I admit, it’s not a simplistic story, sometimes it seems confusing and has a sudden end at which point you sit back and the only thing you can say is “Huh ?”. When you expect a movie with a comprehensible fluently told story, with not too many complications and no shocking impressions, and a happy feel good ending, you better look out for some soft Disney movie .
“Meeting Evil” was a psychotic roller coaster trip where a typical day of a real estate agent very quickly turns into a horrible nightmare with a trip straight to hell. At one time I really had the impression that Samuel L. Jackson was the personification of the devil himself. As if he came straight out of hell, to help the poor guy to take revenge at everyone who made his life hopeless and almost ruined it. Next I had the idea that John (Luke Wilson) was being transferred into a split personality and he himself was on a killing spree. As one of the detectives suggested, it is possible that someone on the verge of a personal bankruptcy and about to lose everything, could snap and start such a mayhem.
Samuel L. Jackson plays the assassin who takes too much satisfaction in killing anyone who in his eyes is disturbingly rude and hypocritical, in a masterful way. His staring was at times stunning. At moments a demonic destructive crazy look. The next moment an understanding and comforting look. Meanwhile using one liners of wisdom and restorative language so that John finally takes matters into his own hands. Luke Wilson had his lesser moments. Sometimes even in a disruptive way. I think that if you have such an experience being tossed around the whole day from one improbable situation to another, you’ll surely have an emotional, anxious and aggressive reaction. But the whole movie he acted as if he was attending a mega funeral. So sad and beaten down. On the other hand, maybe I would be acting in the same way when I was in his situation : an enormous debt, without a job, probably realizing that your wife is playing twister in bed with the muscular young handyman who constructs the pool. Leslie Bibb as John’s wife, surprised me once when she was verbally sweeping the floor with the female detective. The frightened, average housewife suddenly transformed into a fury.
As mentioned, it raises some questions at the end , but I am still convinced that Richie’s statement is close to the ultimate truth . Besides, you can also see at the beginning there’s the intention to shoot John. He had already opened the trunk of his car and his gun ready to shoot , but was stopped by the fact that the little girl with the dog was watching.
There were only few minor things that weren’t that great. First the sometimes rather weird actions of the police. And at the the end the struggle, knife waving and stabbing and hitting with a golf club, looked hugely amateurish. But these disadvantages are outweighed by the whole of this highly entertaining thriller. A perfect film to start another movie weekend.
More reviews here
Movie comment on About Time
ikkegoemikke
Maybe it's because I'm getting older and more mature. Or is it simply because it's a perfect movie ? I put all my money on the second guess because in the end I found it an amazing and captivating romantic comedy . Normally I hate movies containing the combination of romance and humor. Usually the humor is of a questionable level and it threatens to become a corny tearjerker with a predictable happy ending where everyone is happily married. Actually all of that is in this movie , but not on a grotesquely sentimental level as in other chick flicks . Like someone said on IMDb " A chick flick for men" .
Occasionally, I have to listen to my wife and select a movie which will lead to a cozy movie night she can enjoy. Instead of watching again at some nerve wrecking, bloody and violent SF or thriller. With much reluctance I try to look for that kind of movie. The thing that convinced me to choose for "About time" was the SF label it got . Ultimately, the SF part is essential for the whole story, but it is not the crucial element which leaves a lingering impression. It's just a great movie where you get sucked in from the beginning and you feel like you're in the center of the story. Tim has a gift that all men possess in his family . He can go back in time . Not to change (kill Hitler/shag Helen of Troy ) world history .Only situations occurring in his personal life he can change. He wants to use that gift to find the love of his life.
It has immensely funny situations and humorous conversations . I laughed at this film more than any would-be comedy that I have seen in recent months. Those funny situations that happen are so recognizable and pure. Nothing forced, no complicated puns or fetched trivialities . The conversation in the dark restaurant run by blind people . Who came up with that? Their first night and the way Tim returns again and again in time . The frustrations Tim shows while helping Mary to choose an evening dress. I understood him perfectly.Meeting Mary's parents . The one-liners that passed from time to time.The awkward friends like Jay and Rory . Uncle D who was moving in a certain way , but at the same time hilarious. Every time my wife and I laughed about it.
It's enormously romantic. God yes, you get that in a romantic comedy . But it's that romance that also occurs infinite times in real life and not the romance you read in cheap pulp magazines. Sometimes it was brought subtle. Tim could easily use his gift to have a hot night with Charlotte .Finally he says no to that thought and runs back to Mary to ask her to marry him. A symbolic way to show that Mary is his true love . The scene with the live band was also hilarious.
The film also has its emotional moments . These are the moments where the sticker " Beware of irritating objects in the eye" applies to. The relationship with his father gets gradually warmer and caring. The concerns about his sister Kit Kat . The death of his father and the special way he definitively says goodbye. Serene, catchy and stunning. The casting is perfect.
Each character feels like a real individual and fits into the complete picture . Both physically and mentally. Tim is a daydreaming , sometimes awkward but sensitive guy . Domhnall Gleeson delivers a magnificent performance . I didn't recognize him as Bill Weasley of the Potter series , and even as Clan Techie from Dredd . Rachel McAdams who plays Mary is a natural beauty and a charm throughout the film . Bill Nighy puts a rock-solid portrait of the father who struggles with his feelings towards his son. Lindsey Duncan has no big part in this movie, but each time she comes into the picture she has the look of a caring mother. Honestly , there wasn't a single character that I found weak. Finally the soundtrack is also worth a mention . Songs of The Cure , Amy Winehouse , Nick Cave and Ben Folds were a splendid contribution to the overall mood. I've always liked movies.
I watch movies because I want a relaxing moment , a moment to laugh or bite my nails cause of the tension, or nearly get a heart attack from scaring , or sympathize with certain events and sometimes cry a little bit about it . Those are the reasons to watch a movie. And that I found in this movie . My advice is to just give this one a chance and let yourself be carried away on a sentimental and funny roller-coaster ride of emotions.
More reviews here
Movie comment on Riddick
ikkegoemikke
Never heard of Riddick or seen any of the previous films ? I would recommend to move along an skip it . Briefly I assumed that this was a self-standing SF , not knowing that this was the continuation of two previous movies . Weird, I had never heard of Riddick. For me it was like reading a book written in braille . You can see that there's something , but you can't understand a thing from it. After 20 minutes I had no idea what was actually going on and what Riddick was talking about.
I limit myself only to the way the movie looks and ignore the story. It would be unfair to judge the movie on that part. The images of the desolate planet where Riddick ended up ( I suppose it was actually the intention to execute him there), looked quite futuristic and menacing . Only thing what bothered me after a while was the predominant orange color . It looked like a stadium full of supporters from Holland at a World Cup football match . A sea of orange hues . The life threatening species looked stunning in terms of computer animation . Especially the hyena -like desert dogs I found a success and the relation (if you can call it that way) that Riddick had with the puppy was sometimes amusing to see . I found it a pity that it died in the end . The scorpion-like monsters that were in the mud looked convincing in close-up. Only at a distance they looked like rubber-figures.
Riddick was a really cool figure who acted like a half-god with those glittering eyes , his apparently invulnerable body and its ability to predict the ending of certain situations . When the bounty hunters land on the planet it all became more interesting for me. Especially the figure Santana was damn well played with his boastful arrogance and condescending view towards others . The result was a few punches, especially from Dahl , on his tanned face . It's always amusing when some annoying person gets a good spanking. The systematic elimination of the bounty hunters was entertaining and the climax was the cut of head from Santana. A nicely timed and filmed moment. I didn't think the ending was such a success and looked more like a scene from " Alien" but in a sort of Sahara . Furthermore the hover bikes looked like an updated version from those of " Looper " . And the spaceships looked suspicious alike like those that Zod flew in " Man of Steel " . Don't know who stole that idea from whom.
I wasn't that impressed about the movie "Riddick" . The interaction between the bounty hunters on the one hand and the calculated and cold-blooded Riddick on the other hand were positive. I found that Riddick was sometimes an oracle who could feel how things would work out. Perhaps this was a characteristic of the Riddick himself. The biggest drawback was the lack of knowledge of the prehistory . Perhaps a brief summary at the beginning would have been an option.
More reviews here
Movie comment on Skybound
ikkegoemikke
"Above the clouds, everything's pure, beautiful. Sometimes I wonder…why would anyone ever want to return to the ground?"
Ever seen "Chariot"? It's also a low-budget thriller taking place on an aircraft with a limited number of protagonists. The difference with "Skybound" is that it took place on board of a much larger aircraft. But the main difference is the entertainment content and solidity of "Chariot" compared to the emptiness and the lack of inspiration in "Skybound". Not only was the acting sometimes stiff, the conversations were occasionally laughably bad and you can not call it exciting either. But especially the improbabilities and completely ridiculous situations ensured that this otherwise well-cared-for movie ended up in a downward spiral, so that my appreciation also ended up in an arrow-fast nosedive. It started interesting but eventually it irritated me in such a way that I wished this luxurious airplane (Freedom XJ One. I'm sure this type doesn't even exist) would really crash onto the surface of the earth.
The opening scene shows Lisa (Scarlett Byrne) and her date Matt (Rick Cosnett) who are on their way to enjoy a nice weekend, together with a friendly couple. I suppose Lisa and Matt just met, since Matt immediately apologized for driving around in a very expensive car. That means Matt assumes that she doesn't know he's from a wealthy family. And apparently he's also unaware of the fact that she knows his brother brother Kyle (Gavin Stenhouse). Well, wealthy sons have so little free time and therefore spend a minimum of time together, I suppose. Then Matt brings the joyful news that they fly to Malibu, along with Odin (Tyler Fayose) and girlfriend Roxy (Carla Carolina Pimental). And when it turns out that Kyle also has to fly along as co-pilot, you already know that this will be a turbulent flight. Next there's also a stowaway on board who wasn't only looking for food. And landing the plane later on isn't so obvious either, since there is no landing spot to be detected on the surface of the earth.
You thought "Snakes on a plane" was utter crappy and totally whacked. You'll call it a true masterpiece after watching "Skybound". Most of the low-budget films have poorer film quality and amateur-like acting. But in some cases it also has an ingenious, quirky story-line. Strangely enough, this low-budget film is the opposite. The used images aren't that bad at all. The acting isn't disastrous and the idiocy is more due to the choices made by the script writer. But it missed a tad of tension and an atmosphere of total despair. Also the story is as empty as a bottle of wine in the hands of an alcoholic and there are several events that are too stupid for words. It sometimes feels as if they did that deliberately though. For instance. To my surprise, a whole plane was demolished while the entrance door stood wide open and everyone walked calmly around as if it was plain normal. The given situation wouldn't bother me, was it not that they already opened that same door to refresh the air in the plane while everybody was securely tightened. Because the pressure and wind could unintentionally catapult someone from the plane. Weird, not?
And there are a lot of other absurd, ridiculous situations. A perfectly round bullet wound and a bullet being removed perfectly lying flat. And then the amazing speed with which the wounded person recuperates from this wound. Plus the fact that a grown man still believes that the name Odin comes from an African God. One could argue that this is a reflection of the intellectual level of the entire film. But then there are suddenly intelligent statements about the "Traffic Alert and Collision Avoidance" system and the artificial pressure in an airplane. An airplane I'm not eager to take given the firmness with which engines are attached. And lets not forget the totally unlikely ending.
Low-budget B-movies may not be popular, but there are still people who love an old-fashioned survival film that doesn't take itself too seriously (including myself). There are probably more similar low-budget films dealing with an apocalyptic world end with similar stupid content. But most of the time the visual aspects in these films are also of a poorly low level. That's also the most positive feature you can find in "Skybound". The professional looking camera hots (besides the kitschy ice-letters in the clouds at the beginning) which sometimes are the same level as that of blockbusters with a million budget. "Skybound" is a negligible film that leaves no lasting impression. In other words, it certainly isn't a high-flier.
More reviews here
Movie comment on A Family Man
ikkegoemikke
"Cancer is not a negotiation, Mr. Jensen."In "Olympus has fallen" and "London has fallen" Gerard Butler took care of the president of America and fought against a whole battalion of terrorists. In "A family man" Dane Jensen (Gerard Butler) has to fight other demons. On the one hand there's his hectic and energy-hungry job as headhunter. A job he lives for and that keeps him occupied for at least 70 hours a week without exception. And on the other hand there's his charming wife Elise (Gretchen Mol), his son Ryan (Max Jenkins) and daughter Lauren (Julia Butters). A warm family that never lacks anything thanks to Dane's efforts. On a materialistic level that is. Because each and every one of them craves for the presence of a husband and a father figure. Dane may be physically present but in reality he's always busy with his work. This results in displeasure and frustration. Dan always acts like a businessman. When Ryan seems to gain weight, he reacts pragmatically. He just gets up at an inhuman hour to go jogging with his son.
The psychological pressure increases when Dane's boss Ed Blackridge (Willem Dafoe) announces that he's thinking of a well-deserved retirement and passes on his position to the person who can present the best annual figures. You don't have to be a Nostradamus to predict what effect this has on Dan. And then it turns out that Ryan's overweight is not because of playing "Assassin's creed" for hours while enjoying loads of snacks. It's a swollen spleen due to a severe form of leukemia that causes his waistline to increase. Most viewers (including myself) will start rolling their eyes and shake their heads. Not again another sentimental story with that horrible disease as a central theme and the inner conflict certain people will feel. In this case it's Dan who has to find the right balance between his competitive job and the welfare of his son. And he comes to the realization that no compromises can be made or illegal tricks can be used in such a way that the aggravation of the disease can be avoided.
The message is crystal clear after a while. The whole karma and "What goes around comes around" principle is really emphatically emphasized. It's all about that moment when you realize that you shouldn't take everything for granted and you start realizing what's really important in life. I wouldn't be surprised if Dan decided to convert to the monotheistic religion of the Sikhs and move to India to live there as righteous Punjab. The transformation from unscrupulous, senseless workaholic into an insightful family man whose priorities suddenly changed completely, was enormously predictable. But despite that predictability and cheesiness, I couldn't resist to look at the rest of this über-emotional tearjerker.
In terms of content it was perhaps very syrupy sweet and not very original. But in terms of interpretation I can only respect Gerard Butler whose acting-past is richly filled with action-rich roles where an elaborated character wasn't really required. As King Leonidas in "300" and Mike Banning in "London / Olympus has fallen" he only had to be fearless, ruthless and determined. So no complex feelings and character traits. The implausible wasn't due to his acting performance, but due to a reasonably weak script. The most eye-catching and praiseworthy acting is for Max Jenkins who, despite his young age, delivers an admirable performance. Ryan was portrayed realistically by this young boy. The rest of the cast took care of the no less important roles, but they weren't not so explicitly in the spotlight. Gretchen Mol as the disgruntled wife (but on the other hand she was in a privileged position thanks to the well-payed job of her husband). Alison Brie, the ravishing rival of Dan. Willem Dafoe as the single, tyrannical CEO whose life was only focused on making loads of money. And Alfred Molino in a modest role as an unemployed engineer at age, who only serves as a toy in Dan's head hunter's game.
I am not a hypersensitive type or over-sentimental, but when a drama with this kind of subject doesn't not touch me or moves me, then something is wrong. Either it's totally unbelievable or it's so predictable. I'm afraid the movie just follows a well-known path without deviating, so that it has little interesting to offer. Towards the end, I said to my wife: "If that little boy wakes up now, I'll eat my shoe." Never knew that shoe soles were so chewy.
More reviews here
Movie comment on Outcast
ikkegoemikke
Cage can put this one on his "Senseless contribution to meaningless film that brings grist to the mill"-list, because this was a typical mainstream movie. It's been several weeks since I've seen it, and to be honest I can't remember much of it. That's usually a sign that it wasn't a very good film and failed to impress me after all. About Cage's performance we can be brief. As brief as the time he appeared in the film in an unconvincing way. Apparently Cage joined the club of action heroes who choose one soulless trashy movie after another just to collect some pocket money (with the exception of "Joe" I've heard). Even the fact of Anakin Skywalker waving dangerously with his sword in this adventure film, can't change the fact that the final result is disappointingly weak. Probably the pubescent teenage girls present in the audience will experience this as a plus point, but that's the only positive contribution I can think of.
The story begins with Gallain (Nicolas Cage) and Jacob (Hayden Christensen) as two fiery crusaders in the Middle East where they spend their time with cutting up a few Muslims into pieces. Jacob however, with an extremely modern haircut, passes a for Gallain sensitive border and the two eventually go their separate ways. I found it astonishing that they ended up in China. That must have been a very long walk. In this medieval China the king's son Shing (Andy On) can whistle for the throne since the dying king appointed his youngest son Zhao (Bill Su Jiahang) as his heir. Out of fear of revenge, the king sends Zhao together with his charming sister Lian (Liu Yifei) and a royal seal to a safer place. Don't be amazed, but on the way to their safe harbor, they meet Jacob, who now looks more like a premature hippie under the influence of opium, who takes them under his wing.
It looks a bit like what Viggo Mortensen's job was, while being on the road with those hobbits in "The Lord of The Rings". A heroic warrior who acts like a security guard for some innocent and vulnerable young people. And although I always admired Nicolas Cage a lot, this became nevertheless a tedious and very bad movie. Not only has the subject been used a zillion times, there's also a pile of clichés and an atrocious acting Cage. Ultimately, he's not the central figure in this film, although he stands explicitly in the foreground on the movie poster.
Obviously the Chinese princess would fall for Jacob and the small Zhao looking up to him as a super hero whose adventures he followed for years in some comic magazine, was also nothing new under the sun. This movie is not even an alternative to pass your time on a rainy Sunday. Closing your eyes and taking a nap, would be more satisfying. Terrible action scenes (too close and nauseating shaking images) are being followed by incomprehensible fragments. I still can't understand that an army diligently seeks for the two royal children and still can't recognize them when they go into a town before their eyes. And how Jacob could kill an opponent who's riding a horse by using a bow and arrow at a ridiculous far distance and knowing that he usually stumbles around completely drugged, is absolutely ridiculous.
Eventually only Jiahang, Yifei and On acted convincing enough. I asked myself what fashion statement Cage wanted to make by wearing that absurd woolly hat at the end. That was a complete mystery to me. But eventually it matched his entire role : ridiculous. Now I understand why the Chinese distributor Yunnan Film Group ceased the release of this movie a few hours before the screening in thousands of cinemas. It probably has something to do with the Chinese have learned from a young age that they can never lose their face.
More reviews here
Movie comment on The Collection
ikkegoemikke
"He will cut your balls off and feed them to you"Are you a fan of "Saw" and other related torture movies, this will be your cup of tea. But if you were tired of the whole "Saw" saga after part three, you better skip "The Collection" because you can't call it very original. This sequel to "The Collector" (which I've never seen) begins impressive, has an anticipated open end and is terribly boring in the middle, with ridiculously improbable situations. It's never really exciting and ultimately it becomes a cat and mouse game in a big, abandoned hotel, full of deadly and insane booby traps and with rooms that look more surreal as time goes by. To make it somewhat entertaining, I recommend to get a scarf and hat and equip yourself with bells and flags, so that you can encourage the contestants as a real enthusiastic supporter.
Because of the short running time, there's no wasting of time at the beginning of the film. In a flash, we're informed that the city is attacked by a ruthless serial killer called "The Collector". We meet Elena (Emma Fitzpatrick) being towed along by some friends to an obscure secret nightclub. After a skirmish there with her boyfriend, she discovers a suitcase with Arkin (Josh Stewart) trapped in it. Arkin is a victim of the first film who survived and escaped his imprisonment. Only the nightmare starts back again here and short after you'll get to see the most hallucinatory massacre ever. I did something I rarely do. I re-watched that part twice in a row. Once this bloody part is over, you can say that you've watched the best part and from here on it's just a very long carnage. The creators of the film (especially the writer Patrick Melton, who is also responsible for SAW IV, V, VI and VII) paid more attention to the level of sadism than the story itself. You can easily guess what'll come next. Elena is kidnapped by "The Collector" and Arkin is recruited as a guide for a group of mercenaries to rescue her out of the hands of this sadist.
Putting this film in the same league as "Saw", is for the latter a little unworthy. The concept of "Saw" was of a very different nature and was put together somewhat subtler. I must admit that "Saw" impressed me. "Jigsaw" kidnapped people because he felt they deserved it, because of the sins they have committed in the past. The choice they had was to save themselves from their situation in a painful way or simply die. "The Collector" had no exact plan in mind in my opinion. He's simply a psychopath who transforms his victims into grotesque artworks and saves it in formaldehyde. Or he uses them as a favorite pastime and tortures them brutally. His identity is not revealed in this film. It remains a sinister stranger who occasionally puts on a mask and starts killing brutally.
It's totally absurd to talk about character development, because that's missing completely. First you have the seemingly invincible killer who has a built-in GPS system because he always appears at the right time and in the right place in this fairly large hotel. And next we have a bunch of mercenaries who will solve the problem. The fact that the one they are hunting just reshaped a whole gang of disco goers into ready-to-eat barbecue packets, apparently doesn't impress them and they enter unfamiliar terrain seemingly carefree. Their fate is also in hands of one person who knew where this lugubrious building was situated just by using clues he carved into his arm. I would clear off and leave the job to a whole army of soldiers.
There are also inexplicable moments in this film. The way they free themselves out of the metal cage is nonsense. And especially if you see how that person swings into action afterwards, as if it's hunky dory. Most serial killers in other slasher movies have a motive and a pattern. This "Collector" guy apparently doesn't have a clue about any plan and just goes on doing stuff. He kills, chops and cuts around, slices and assembles bodies, tortures and torments when he has time. He uses all kinds of instruments to achieve his goal (not like Michael Myers who invariably uses a butcher knife) and also he drugs a whole bunch of victims so they can be used as an army of zombies against intruders. And that's not all. He also has a collection of raging dogs and tarantulas. You see, there's enough variation. Ultimately, it's just a mediocre film with a great deal of attention for the traps and the bloody effects of them. It's a tough film and the pace is very fast. So fast that you may have missed some slaughtering. Don't worry ! In the end you get a second chance to watch it again during the end credits. The end invites for a successor, but I'm sure I'm going to skip it.
More reviews here
Movie comment on The Physician
ikkegoemikke
"Remember boy ! The more painful the treatment, the more they respect the Barber.""The Physician" is a beautiful, old-fashioned adventure film, situated in the dark ages with its poverty and unsanitary conditions. In those days the church still had some influence so it punished any scientific progress because these odious practices were against the will of God. And despite the terrible poverty, they were showing up in a flash in order to extort the last money those poor people had, as a compensation for some ritual they've performed. The same happened to Rob after the passing of his mother. In these dark times people died of an innocent appendicitis or pneumonia. Rob is abandoned to his fate but sees a chance to travel with an itinerant quack who performs surgery in a questionable manner and sells healing potions most likely manufactured from horse urine. When Rob is told that in the distant Middle East, a man named Ibn Sina teaches medicine and puts this knowledge into practice, his decision made. He leaves for the Middle East to be educated by this wise man. The only requirement is that he must appear as a Jew. This also had some consequences for his foreskin
A fascinating historical film made in Germany ("Der Medicus'). First I was surprised that this was a German film since it has the look and feel of a Hollywood movie. In retrospect it's also a bit logical. The book this film is based on and written by Noah Gordon, was not a success in the US, but all the more in Germany. It was also massively viewed in Germany and they made a mini TV series out of it. The rest of Europe unfortunately will only enjoy this wonderful film when it comes out on DVD. It's a successful film with a lot of attention paid to the sets, costumes, music and CGI. If you add the even brilliant performances to it, you finally end up with an admirable and excellent product. The 150 minutes are over before you know it, because you are sucked into the story in a way.
The performances were extraordinarily beautiful. Tom Payne as the inquisitive and innocent looking Rob, Stellan Skarsgard ("The Railway Man," "Kill your Darlings) as the itinerant quack who takes care of Rob and at the same time knows absolutely no compassion sometimes. I didn't recognize Emma Rigby immediately, even though I only just saw her at work in "Plastic". Her fake appearance in that movie (botox treatment most likely) was transformed miraculously into a more natural appearance. But what elevates this film to a higher level, is the casting of Ben Kingsley as the Persian philosopher who wants to pass his knowledge to motivated pupils and at the same time exhibits an unprecedented hunger for knowledge. A masterful performance and a realistic portrayal of Ibn Sina, the Muslim physician, philosopher, physicist and scientist who made important contributions to medicine and whose studies were respected in Europe for a long time. Apparently Kingsley likes playing the role of a physician or psychologist. He has the appropriate appearance and his charismatic personality is perfect for it. Just watch "Shutter Island" or "Stone Hearst Asylum" and you'll see.
But also the overall appearance of the film looks grand and wonderful. From shabby, dark and especially dingy London to the oriental scenes in distant Persia and the Madrasa College. The costume department has done its utmost to display it as authentic as possible. How Philipp Stölzl and Jan Berger have shaped this film and managed to make a movie with Hollywood proportions, is admirable. The only drawback is that there are also some Hollywood clichés like the storyline about Rebecca and Rob. Fortunately they avoided to show epic grand battles and focused on Ibn Sina and the influence of religion in that time. The only thing that bothered me personally was the so-called gift Rob had. The timeless topics about health and religious fanaticism dominate this wonderful film. Some won't like the old-fashioned tone, but in the end I really enjoyed this medieval adventure film. A film set in an era when the Middle East was a source of knowledge and progress.
More reviews here
Movie comment on Gremlin
ikkegoemikke
"What do you think happens to us when we die?I don't know.
I guess it's a lot like it is before you're born."
First of all, let me warn all of you who assume that this is a continuation of the 1984 masterpiece "Gremlins". Believe me, this movie has nothing to do with it. Not even close. Not when it's about the level of entertainment. Not content wise. And certainly not when you look at the acting skills. If there was one particular aspect that got on my nerves while watching this B-category horror, it was the terrible acting. Not only was it silly sometimes. But it felt so amateurish and forced. There is not even a sparkle of humor present in this movie. No malicious Gremlins who organize an orgy in a local pub. Or an elderly lady being launched while sitting in her chair lift. Or were the moronic conversations meant to be humorous? I'm afraid not.
However, the starting point and basic idea were quite inventive and original. A metallic cube, with a clock-looking image full of astrological drawings, that contains something you don't want to be confronted with. And there's only one golden rule that'll make sure you'll get rid of this detestable thing. You just have to pass it on to someone you love. Talking about a dilemma. A poisoned gift for someone you really love. And that's what James eventually did when his family probably already has been liquidated by the bloodthirsty creature. He gives it to his mother. Little did he know there were more family members in his mum's house at that moment. And before you know it, the little creature begins using its sharp limbs and bodies start piling up. Eventually it's Adam Thatcher (Adam Hampton) who's shackled to the devilish box.
The most positive thing about this indie horror, is the design of the-creature-with-a-tireless-killer-instinct. Despite the fact that the budget is significantly lower than most movies with computer-generated creatures, they've succeeded in creating a highly realistic little monster. But, as in "Big ass spider", the non-proportionally shaped copy is of much lower quality. It looks like a fake, plastic figure that comes to life using stop motion techniques (Even "Shaun the sheep" looks better). Similar to the giant insects in SF films of the 70s. Also content wise it was quite creative. For example, it's not obvious for the Thatcher family to get rid of the cube. If they think that they are put out of their misery just by randomly passing it on to someone (a bit as how the problem was solved in "It follows"), they are in for a disappointment. Apparently, the mysterious creature can feel in a certain way that you don't really love the new owner. The fact that the box shows up over and over again, regardless of what Adam is trying to do, was to be expected. To be honest, it was utterly annoying after numerous attempts.
If this film was made in the 80's, the end product would be appropriate and undoubtedly added to other released monster-horror films. Unfortunately, the looks of the gremlin (I still wonder why it's called that way), the rare exciting moments (the confrontation between daughter Anna (Katie Burgess) and the monster) and the intriguing subject won't make it a great movie. And this is caused, in particular, the inadequate acting, the stupidities, the sometimes bad SE's (especially the wounds looked kitschy) and the limited story line. The naivety with which certain problems are solved, is sometimes quite ridiculous (like hiding bodies in the basement). And once again, the policemen aren't smarter than the two idiots from "Dumb and Dumber". Most hilarious moment was the response of a detective who advised detective Harris (Kyle Pennington) to contact Lucy Anifero, a gypsy and apparently someone who knows something about occult and bizarre things. After Harris got a decent explanation about the devilish cube, the first comment of this detective was : "She's hot, right?". You can't expect that such an idiot would solve the case.
Are you a fan of such a type of SF-horror and you're a fan of anything that's related to the 80's, I can recommend it (there's even an Alien-like fragment). You won't be flabbergasted and you won't be blown away by world-shocking novelties, but it can provide brief entertainment.
PS. I read this hilarious review on Letterboxd and actually summarizes it a bit : My roommate and I decided to watch a movie tonight. I asked her if she wanted to watch The Dark Tower, 'cause I hadn't seen it yet. She said "No, I've already seen it and it's the worst movie of the year". So we watched this instead. Once it was over, her only comment was "We should have watched The Dark Tower…"
More reviews here
Movie comment on Atomic Blonde
ikkegoemikke
"You know those movies where the picture just starts to slow down… and melt?Then catch fire?
Well… that's Berlin."
What was the overall feeling after watching "Atomic Blonde"? For me it was a mixture of confusion and excitement at the same time. Confusion because of the complex story with a multitude of twists and spy related mumbo jumbo. To be honest, I always have that with this kind of movies. So you can assume that I'm not a big fan of espionage movies. Not even James Bond movies. Even though these story lines are rather straightforward and simplistic in my eyes. "Atomic Blonde" on the other hand is in a different league. At a certain point I didn't know anymore what was going on and what role the main characters played. I even forgot the main goal. The only things I still could re-imagine in the end, were the fierce action scenes and the appetizing looking curves of Charlize Terron. Should all female spies in a movie use the same wardrobe as Terron did here, I instantly would become a fervent fan of this genre. There's nothing so exciting as a blonde shrew, wearing sensual knee-length boots and sexy suspenders, who gives her male opponents a solid kick in their glockenspiel.
Guess what. I was more excited about the soundtrack used here. Perhaps this was disruptive to some but personally I thought this was pleasant addition. Well, maybe it's because I'm a hard-core fan of music from the 80's. And I'm not talking about boys-bands or disco music, but the underground and alternative kind of music. Unfortunately, they had to choose the most annoying song from the entire Neue Deutsche Welle repertoire. During that period I often wished for Nena to disappear with her 99 air balloons beyond the horizon. It would have been way better to include "Stunde des Glücks" from Fehlfarben or "Schlachtet!" From Grauzone. But besides this weak moment, I was pleasantly surprised to hear "Cities in dust" from Siouxsie & the Banshees, "Cat People" by David Bowie and "I ran" from A flock or seagulls. In terms of mood, this musical framework certainly made for a positive feeling. In retrospect, I'll remember this playlist more than the movie itself.
It's all about an ultra-secret list (hidden in a wristwatch) with names of spies who are actively working in the Soviet Union doing … uh … I suppose spy-work. The entire film is situated in dark Berlin of the 80's, where the ultimate symbol of the cold war still stands. The Berlin wall. It's in the shadow of this gray decor where this spy movie takes place. In this post-war city, Lorraine Broughton (Charlize Theron) tries to get the list back together with colleague spy David Percival (James McAvoy), who has his own agenda apparently. The fact there are other sharks in this spy-pond who are interested in getting that list, is something Lorraine experiences real soon. The entire story is displayed in flashback mode. The whole story is being told by Lorraine during a debriefing in the presence of Eric Gray (Toby Jones), some superior at MI6, and Emmett Kurzfeld (John Goodman) from the C.I.A. What follows are some bad-ass action sequences that'll thrill you. Unfortunately, these impressive, action-filled scenes are no guarantee to make it a memorable movie .
Perhaps it was the intention to make a female "John Wick" spin-off. But unlike the latter, where action scenes followed each other in a breathtaking pace, this movie only contains three (sublime choreographed) violent and action-packed scenes. First the German Polizei notices that the color of their green uniforms is replaced by the color of emerging bruises and dripping blood. And as icing on the cake you'll be presented with a damn elongated scene where KGB agents are being banged up pretty bad. Next you'll see an intense car chase across Berlin. And then you'll get a plot twist involving double agents and counterespionage shizzle. And that's where I suddenly lost the thread. To be honest, that's it in a nutshell. Even the lesbian it's-supposed-to-be-a-hot scene wasn't interesting enough to get me ecstatic. In my view, this was added just so the presence of Delphine Lasalle (Sofia Boutella) seemed functional again.
In terms of acting, it was quite all right, although Charlize Theron impressed me more as Furiosa in "Mad Max: Fury Road". James McAvoy was sublime. But then again, I thought he was more convincing as the guy with a split personality in "Split". Eddie Marsan, John Goodman and Toby Jones complete the rest of the cast and showed once again their acting skills. But despite the brilliant acting, the violent and furious action, the atmospheric images and a soundtrack which made me feel young again, I thought the story-line was incoherent, quite inconsistent and superfluous. You can't call it the counterpart of "John Wick". And for those who say this film is amazing because of the fact that it's an action movie with a female action heroine in it, I suggest to look up these movies and re-watch them : "Alien", "Terminator", "Salt" or "Kill Bill". You'll also see an action heroine with giant cajones, who's filleting the other sex (or species) without blinking an eye. But still, highly recommended.
More reviews here
Movie comment on Cold Moon
ikkegoemikke
"I never seen nothing like this.Well, you might want to have a little chat with the father. He's dead. In fact, he died in the sticks too, about 13 years ago.
No, I mean the father of the baby she's carrying.
This girl's about four months pregnant."
Not long ago I received an invitation to attend the premiere of "Cold Moon" in the company of the creators and actors, including Christopher Lloyd. Needless to say, I was slightly excited at that moment. Imagine me being in the same room together with one of my youth idols. Together in the same movie theater with Dr. Emmett Brown, the crazy professor who made the time-spiral unsafe with his converted Deloreon in "Back to the Future". Would I be as enthusiast about the movie in question, I would have been mad at myself for not booking a flight. Unfortunately, the enthusiasm was totally absent while watching the screener that was sent to me. Even though "Cold Moon" is similar to those cheap 80s vintage horror-films. I get melancholic when I think about that period. In those days, I always came home overloaded with a stack of rented VHS cassettes, after which I sat down in front of the TV the whole weekend.
"Cold moon" is an ordinary crime story that could serve as an episode in the Columbo series. However, there are also supernatural entities scaring the living sh*t out of the perpetrator (although he turns his back to them during most confrontations. Nerves of steel, I guess). And all this begins the day Margaret Larkin (Sara Catherine Bellamy) is on her way home and is being thrown into the local creek with her bike. She drowns on the spot. When her body is caught by a fisherman out of the water, it's the beginning of a search for the perpetrator (That shouldn't be such a hard task for the sheriff, since it's such a small community). Grandmother Evelyn Larkin (Candy Clark) points her accusatory finger at Nathan Redfield (Josh Stewart), son of James Redfield (Christopher Lloyd) tycoon and founder of the only bank there.
And at the same time, Margaret's wicked spirit winches itself out of the water and starts to haunt the killer. It's not entirely clear why Margaret returns as a revenge-seeking spirit. It's also unclear why the identity of the perpetrator was announced so quickly. In my opinion, the rest of the movie must be damn intriguing enough and of high quality when doing that. There's no tension anymore. And that's the big drawback in this movie. It's not really scary or thrilling. A horror without creepy moments or a frightening atmosphere can hardly be called a horror. Even though the apparitions and ghostly images are at times quite successful.
The acting performances are equivalent to that of the overall atmosphere of the film. Rather bland with a few exceptions. The only one who sort of made an impression was Josh Stewart. Although most of the time he walks around with sleepy, semi-closed eyes due to the amount of alcohol he consumed throughout the day. He doesn't look like a real manic psychopath, but his personality shows some dark sides. Christopher Lloyd's role is no big deal and is limited to a few minutes. The only thing he does is gaze at the local beauty queen (Rachel "Miss Pie" Brooke Smith) while jabbering unintelligible sentences. And then you have Evelyn (Candy Clark) and Jerry Larkin (Chester "My father die" Rushing), trying to run a blueberries farm. You can't say it's high-quality acting during their short-term presence. Especially Candy Clark was an annoying character who constantly acts hysterically after the death of her granddaughter.
"Cold Moon" isn't extremely bad, but it wasn't convincing either. Personally, I think the movie poster is brilliant, but overall the movie is just a weak attempt. The attempt to make some kind of horror didn't work well. The movie has nostalgic value. Certainly if you've experienced the 80's intensely when talking about horror movies. I'm sure you'll see this movie on some television channel in the middle of the night in the future. However, I wouldn't stay up for it.
More reviews here
Movie comment on Chef
ikkegoemikke
"You're never going to be happy cooking for someone else."If there's one thing I really hate, it's those countless cooking television shows (and variations) we get on our plate (how appropriate) recent years. They even founded television channels like "24 Kitchen" and "Njam" where you can view cooking 24 hours a day. How is it possible. You can't even surf your TV-channels on an average night without bumping into some cooking program where they are preparing a delicious dish again. I'm sick and tired of hearing the terminology like baking,flaming, roasting, steaming, filleting, Bain-Marie, stewing, poaching, ragout, caramelize and the hype-word in recent years "cuisson". I'm not sick of seeing those plates with tasty food, but the oversupply of television programs with people cooking enthusiastically. Suddenly, any known chef de cuisine or unknown cooking amateur has a TV-show where they can demonstrate their skills while brandishing a wooden spoon.
Why the hell would I watch a movie like "Chef"? Especially when I already know in advance that it's mainly about cooking. Perhaps out of curiosity? The only cooking-related films I've ever seen are "Ratatouille" (where there's even a rat in charge) and "La Grande Bouffe" (but this film showed the art of cooking in a very different lurid way). Maybe it's because Jon Favreau played the leading role. Not that I've seen him acting that much. He had a small part in "Friends" years ago, he starred in "The Break-up" and he also did something in "Iron Man" and "The Wolf of Wall Street". He also directed the first successful "Iron Man". But it's his charisma that convinced me. He looks like a cheerful and sociable chubby guy who converses in a fairly amusing and slightly lisping manner. Looking at the size of his waist I guess he's also a fan of culinary excesses and therefore he's perfect for this role as chef. And then there's also the pleasure of admiring Sofia Vergara as Inez, the ex-wife of Carl. What a killer babe. I'll never understand why someone would want to divorce such an adorable,sensual person. I'm sure her butt look more appetizing than that of the pig that Carl cuts into pieces in the beginning of the film.
Cooking in itself is a central theme in this film, but the main focus is on other matters. Firstly, there is the father-son relationship that has grown crooked after a while. Carl focused fully on his prestigious place in the kitchen, so he ignored and neglected his son Percy (Emjay Anthony). The whole film is about the recovery of that relationship and rediscovering each other in a beautiful, serene, sometimes funny and sometimes sad way. Secondly, it shows how in today's society it's seemingly dead simple to ruin someones career simply by writing a destructive review. The consequences of a flame-war could have far-reaching consequences. Especially if the virtual brawl goes viral. And then it shows once again how that virtual world is merged with our daily life The way Percy uses Facebook, Twitter and other online services while driving around America with a food truck, is perhaps a bit exaggerated, but it is an example of the impact of the internet nowadays.
"Chef" is nothing more than just another film in which the main character is successful in the beginning, has to go through a deep valley with the known setbacks and towards the end he rises again unscathed from the battle as a conquering hero. And in "Chef" everything really turns out all right again. This is not an ordinary feel-good movie, but an extraordinary feel-good movie. But despite that, you can really enjoy other things. The juicy lingo of his two confidants Tony and Martin. The enthusiasm Percy shows during the trip. Yet a little warning though : make sure you have eaten firmly before you watch this film, because I guarantee you'll be running into the kitchen now and then to get a snack. At times it looks so delicious and appetizing, I spontaneously started to drool. Those browned butter filled Cuban grill sandwiches were so painfully slow prepped, it was almost a torture. A 3D flat screen TV with scents option, would have been ideal at that particular moment.
A blandly and not too complicated film. In cooking terms one can summarize it as follows: it's not expensive haute cuisine but simple food that they serve us here. A film with a positive attitude (rare nowadays) with beautiful renditions and a surprising supporting cast. Dustin Hoffman as the old restaurant owner who only trusts a classic,safe menu and doesn't feel like following the new trends. Scarlett Johansson as a colleague of Carl who supports him on all fronts. Robert Downey Jr. as the eccentric rich man who helps Carl getting started. Jon Favreau who still has the passion to create eatable art even when things get him down. Emjay Anthony is doing everything to get back his father's attention he's entitled to and at the same time shows his talents. And the whole film is dressed with a sauce of hugely catchy music. Normally I don't pay attention to the soundtrack, but in this film it fits like a glove. The Salsa music creates that summer feeling, the blues kicks in when it starts to be corny and "Sexual Healing" is sung a capella. The soundtrack is a perfect ingredient for this tasty movie. Don't expect profound life lessons in "Chef". But the end result is still a pleasant and definitely tasty-looking ride. Favreau supplies a genuine end product that tastes moreish ...
More reviews here
Movie comment on The Rover
ikkegoemikke
"You should never stop thinking about a life you've taken. That's the price you pay for taking it."Now this was a really bizarre movie. The only thing that sticks in my mind is that it's a terribly slow film with a brilliant soundtrack. After watching "Chef" I was starving. After watching "The Rover" I was very thirsty. It's obvious that this film, which is set in Australia in a post-apocalyptic period, will automatically be compared with "Mad Max". And despite that there are many elements of excellent quality, it's just a dead simple storyline which is blown up out of proportion in a bombastic and rather pretentious way so the artistic moviegoers will give it a standing ovation.
The whole movie can be summarized as follows: a trio of criminals are on the run for something they have done. They steal a car they purely accidentally come across , while rolling over across the screen with their getaway car , somewhere in the-middle-of-nowhere. The owner of this car is not pleased with that and sets off in pursuit because there's something precious for him in that car. And along the way he picks up one of the abandoned brother. That's it! The rest you can complete as you please using your own imagination because you don't get much information about where, why and how this whole situation developed in this art-house film.
The opening scene with the three gangsters in the car drifting along the road and arguing the whole time, has a very high "Pulp Fiction" feeling. The part in which you see Eric (Guy Pearce) awakening / getting sober / coming to his senses (use your imagination) and after wards stumbling into a sort of boiling hot metal silo that looks like a karaoke bar because of the extremely loud oriental music, can be compared with a scene out of a spaghetti western with a gunslinger who stumbles into a town in the middle of a godforsaken desert under the red-hot Nevada sun. These two interwoven sequences with the brilliant sequence of images of an in slow motion crashing getaway car, is perfection itself. It looked so promising. But the expectations were not fulfilled. Ultimately it's just a typical road movie in dusty arid Australia.
How did things get to this stage and what caused this community to become a totally wild, lawless and dog eating Australian civilization ? That's something you can only guess. You only get the puzzling message "Ten Years after the collapse" at the beginning. What collapse do they mean? Is it about an economic collapse after which the Australian dollars became totally worthless. That could be the reason why everybody is always asking for American dollars. You could also assume that the immune system has collapsed. Because to be honest it's a bunch of freaks you are confronted with. At times I had the impression that Eric and Rey were a kind of mutated zombies, because they were highly resistant to the impact of bullets from automatic rifles.
The entire film is drenched in the hopelessness of the survivors and the stark hostility that prevails there. The situation is similar to the dusty Wild West. Also taking the law into their own hands. This makes for some gruesome scenes of gratuitous violence and explicit aggressive shocking images. Michôd is not really interested in telling a linear, clear story in "The Rover" but rather likes to exhibit an artistic set of images in this film. The purpose of the pursuit by Eric remains unclear until the end. Eric himself is not exactly an open book and keeps his motives hidden, using his gruff and closed nature. By the way, this is a magnificent performance by Guy Pearce, who I can still remember as Mike from "Neighbours" long time ago when this soap ran on television. I've never noticed him in another movie. But I'm sure there are a lot of films he played in I never saw till now. I didn't recognize him with that scraggly beard and his tired, almost suicidal attitude. Robert Pattinson also excels as the slightly deranged Rey who always started telling some unintelligible and unimportant story on the most inconvenient moments. In short, grandiose renditions.
What intrigued me in this film was the soundtrack. An eerie and mysterious sound used as an underlay. A cacophony of all sorts of exotic sounds, including a didgeridoo I think. A wonderful addition to the sometimes hallucinatory images which made it even more chilling.
A fairly quirky film with images used as art. Sensitive and brilliant performances. And an excellent soundtrack. But ultimately there remains a fairly superficial and boring storyline. For me it was a bit too "arty" and too difficult to fathom. I read somewhere, "A person who sits brainless in front of the screen, just sees a man on a devastating journey throughout a desert landscape." I certainly wasn't watching it brainless, but eventually that's also the only thing I saw ....
More reviews here
Movie comment on Torn
ikkegoemikke
"I have a bomb and a Pakistani kid, so I'm sure you can appreciate where we'll have to go with this""Torn" manages to shake off the label "TV Movie", thanks to the wonderful performances of the two female protagonists Mahnoor Baloch (Maryam) and Dendrie Taylor (Lea), two mothers who slowly grow closer to each other and support each other in their grief after the loss of their two sons, Walter and Eddie. The two teenage boys were killed in a blast that took place in a shopping mall. In the first place the explosion was due to a gas leak. Afterwards the accusations start which leads to resentment, anger and blaming each other. The film title can be interpreted in different ways. Is it about the wrenching feelings of sadness ? Or is it about the breaking up of an accidentally formed friendship ? Or is it about the torn bodies of the victims after the bombing?
Their friendship was put to a test by the fact that the alleged gas leak apparently wasn't the cause of the explosion. An FBI investigation was started because there were indications that it could be a terrorist attack. First Walter could be the culprit. On the one hand his Muslim Pakistani origin and on the other hand an incident where he fought with some other students after they used some racist statements, made sure he was placed on the list of suspects. The fact that his father Ali (Faran Tahir), was suspected as an accomplice in the attacks on the Twin Towers (this was refuted afterwards) is an additional factor. Eddie also appears to be one of the suspects since he expressed death threats against some students who bullied him all the time. After the bombing, the group of bullies was severely decimated, so Eddie came in sight of the FBI.
"Torn" is not a spectacle. Don't expect spectacular action moments with devastating explosions and victims flying around with severed limbs as a result. It's rather the explosive interaction between two cultures and the subtle way the racism and prejudices are shown. "Torn" manages to cram the tense issues like bullying among youth, racism and terrorism in a single film without using visual masterpieces. But although this was omitted, it remains a 80-minute short film which is interesting and fascinating to watch. Also it shows how the media in an indiscriminate manner draws conclusions and the resulting publications are the cause that the personal lives of individuals are ruined.
As mentioned before, the biggest part of acting is seized by the two female actresses. Mahnoor Balach is a Pakistani beauty with an engaging personality who charms you while performing on the screen. A gentle person with an endearing English with that well-known Pakistani accent. Dendrie Taylor didn't really rang a bell. Yet I had recently seen her twice in another movie without knowing it. She was Degroat's date in "Out of the furnace" and Lillian Disney in "Saving Mr. Banks". I really couldn't recognize her in this last movie. In this film she just needs to show her face which is loaded with emotions. It speaks volumes. The face of a single woman working as a cleaning-lady in the evenings, probably a poorly paid job, who must provide for the education of her teenage son. A hardworking woman who apparently isn't on good terms with her ex who doesn't bother about his son's education.
So the focus is on the relationship between these two women and the way they deal with their grief and loss, the breach of confidence that develops and eventually the growing back to each other. It has also a wonderful closures which is an indictment against the phenomenon of "prejudice" and once again proves that not everything is as it seems. A film that fits perfectly with the movie "The Citizen" that raises the same problems. "Torn" is a film with two beautiful interpretations. A film with an intensely emotional topic without turning into a corny tearjerker.
More reviews here
Movie comment on Edge of Tomorrow
ikkegoemikke
"What do we do now? I don't know. We've never gotten this far."Frankly, thus far I am very disappointed about the movies I was looking forward to for so long. In "Godzilla" the infamous monster was totally absent, "Transcendence" was too ordinary and meaningless, "Divergent" was just another SF Fantasy tale for teenage girls, "300 Rise of an Empire" was just like "300", "The Expendables 3" looked exhausted and are in need of a replacement and "Pompeii" was a storm in a teacup. Only "Robocop", "Guardians of the Galaxy","Maleficent" and "Captain America: Winter Soldier" could surprise and enchant me. I wasn't expecting much from "Edge of Tomorrow". Partly due to the fact that Mr. Cruise probably would be shining on the screen again the way he always does. That's what I thought! What a big mistake that was. For me "Edge of Tomorrow", a film based on the Japanese comic book "All you need is kill" by Hiroshi Sakurazaka, is already THE summer blockbuster.
Imagine an invasion on a vast coastline in France as in "Saving Privat Ryan," but this time in a more futuristic perspective. High-tech helicopters flying through the sky and dropping "Robocop"-like soldiers on the beach, who immediately start a massive battle against fierce aliens, called Mimics, who look as if they appeared in "The Matrix". You get an adrenaline boost while watching this battlefield with advancing forces being massacred. And in between is a pity looking Colonel Cage (Tom Cruise) who in an inexplicable way got promoted from Colonel to an ordinary soldier with an indelible stain. He turns out to be a deserter, so to speak. He gets an ultra modern combat equipment and he's ordered to be part of the first platoon which will lead the invasion and will throw itself in the middle of this bloody war. Ironically, he has no idea how to turn off the safety of his Japanese speaking equipment, and so he's killed almost instantly. Due to circumstances however, he ends up in a sort of time-cycle like Bill Murray experienced in "Groundhog Day". He goes back in time again and again to the moment when he wakes up at the base from where the invasion is coordinated.
Only some questions remained. Why exactly was it that particular point in time ? Was it Bill Cage who determined this ? Maybe I've overlooked the answer or I misunderstood something. But don't let this spoil the fun because it's a fascinating, action-packed, exciting and sometimes humorous stunner of a movie. Even the presence of Cruise didn't bother me. Normally Cruise is such an actor who has such an ego and pretentiousness that the screen is filled with his personality anyway. This was better than expected. Even his room wide dazzling smile shrank perceptibly. And to be honest, this film is fun for all moviegoers. Those who can't stand Cruise may rejoice about the fact that Cruise gets exterminated numerous times. Those who idolize Cruise can be thrilled because he comes back to live over and over again so he can restart the mission as a true hero.
Doug Liman created a heart-pounding raging SF. It's something like "The Bourne Identity". A successful concept and probably because of the extremely devious put together script. Despite the fact that the same event is repeated a few times, this isn't really disturbing, because Bill Cage attempts to tackle the situation each time in a different way. And this leads sometimes to hilarious moments.
As said before, the rather timid Tom Cruise played an enjoyable role as Colonel Cage. But the moment Emily Blunt appears on the scene as Rita Vrataski, "The Angel of Verdun", everything speeds up and the interactions and fragments become humorous and entertaining. She's the perfect choice as the fierce female soldier who's also extremely attractive at the same time. I remembered the days when I sat at home before my monitor for hours struggling with an extremely difficult mission in "Call of Duty". Frustrated I always started over again trying in a different way till I succeeded to fight my way through it. The same principle is used in "Edge of Tomorrow". Also, there were two noteworthy supporting roles. Brendan Gleeson played the ruthless General Brigham and you can see Bill Paxton in a very amusing role as the drill sergeant Farell.
It's obvious I'm really enthusiastic about this movie and had a great time watching this highly entertaining movie. It's certainly a candidate for the title of "Best action movie" of the year 2014. The other candidate competing for this title is for me "Captain America: Winter Soldier". And right now it's a tie. Despite the end being a bit illogical, this SF is highly recommended. A lot of action packed scenes in a furious pace. A dazzling spectacle with some contagious humor and surprising plot twists. Fortunately a corny romance was omitted. And finally, Tom Cruise effacing himself in relation to the whole picture. All this makes this film a must-see. And I'm going to do something I rarely do: I'm going to re-watch it !
More reviews here
Movie comment on Kill Your Darlings
ikkegoemikke
"Some things, once you've loved them, become yours forever. And if you try to let them go... They only circle back and return to you. They become part of who you are......or they destroy you."
After watching a few blockbusters I always get the urge to put on a not so commercial film. The title of this one combined with the fact that I'm not a real expert in literature, made sure that my expectations about "Kill your darlings" were totally misjudged. The phrase "Kill your darlings" is used in literary circles and is a maxim for writers and poets to delete favorite wordings, adjectives or phrases so that their writings become tighter and not defiled with unnecessary ballast. So you can expect to hear a lot of intellectual posturing in this film. It's actually a biographical drama about the origins of the "beat generation" in America and the young adults who support this : Allen Ginsburg, Jack Kerouac and William Burroughs. All of them became renowned writers and poets after wards.
I also was an avid bookworm in the past and I devoured innumerable books. I wasn't a fan of the literature with a capital L, but rather took pleasure in reading books written by Jack Vance, Raymond Elias Feist, Terry Pratchett, Terry Goodkind and Koontz among others. Not exactly literary heavyweights but masters of the fantasy and SF genre. My intellectual level probably wasn't of such a nature that I could appreciate magical realism, expressionism or neo-romanticism. Just as modern art, I think it means, describing the most trivial objects in such way, that they become fascinating objects. At one stage Allen, William and Lucien shred some books from great writers in pieces, and text fragments are nailed to the wall so they can form a coherent whole. A creation of literature out of chaos as it were. However I can empathize with the mood of the characters involved. I myself was also such a rebel once and didn't have the attitude of walking within the lines. Ultimately, you can see these beatniks as early forerunners of an anarchist movement in literature. Kicking the standardized writers who abide all elitist rules and styles in the shins.
The film is set in the aftermath of the 2nd World War, which is reflected in the whole atmosphere : the decor, the props, the music and the zeitgeist. This is also the most successful item in this film directed by John Krokidas. His first feature film he surely can be proud of and in which he succeeds in portraying the feeling of that time. You are witnessing the tipping point in the prudish American society where the youth of that time was looking for new trends and creative outlets. This manifested itself in dank little pubs where they played jazz, pseudo intellectual gatherings where gallons of alcohol was being consumed, experimenting with all kinds of mind-altering drugs and scanning the sexual boundaries and tolerances in this area.
The performances were all sublime. Dane DeHaan as the extrovert and intellectual Lucien Carr, the pivotal figure in this whole drama, who does look like a gay, blue-eyed blonde charmer, but reflects a genuine uncertainty about his sexual orientation. Michael "Dexter" Hall, who recently starred in "Cold in July", plays a homosexual stalker who sinks to the bottom of some pond in the beginning of the film. Jack Huston as Jack Kerouac. Ben Foster as William Burroughs. An intellectual who comes from a wealthy family, who's constantly experimenting with all sorts of drugs and therefore speaks in slow motion with a deep, rough voice the entire movie. And Daniel "Harry" Radcliffe as Allen Ginsberg. Radcliffe really does some effort to finally wipe that "Potter" stamp away. I have to admit that he plays in this film with very different magic wands. And yet I admire him for not giving in and choosing the obvious roles. After his not so bad performance in "The woman in black" he's now trying a more serious role with some fairly bold homosexual scenes. I'm still wondering about his sexual orientation now. The passion he shows while kissing his male opponents speaks volumes. And despite his efforts, once and a while that "Harry Potter"-smile that made him famous, appears again. After he sees the act of Carr in the school library you can admire that boyish roguish smile. The only thing missing is that twinkle in his eyes. Not a bad performance, but at times it was really superficial and it seemed more like a Shakespearean tragedy.
A difficult film. And despite its boring subject, it continued to fascinate me. A crime drama without that much drama. A passion that leads to a crime, but it's certainly not the emphasis. It's rather a film full of philosophical musings and constant literary debating by those who'll be the greatest in literature. All this with a solid bottle of wine and glass of whiskey after a hearty sniff of nitrous oxide. At times I also wished I had that in reach so this film would be more light-hearted. But still, respect for Radcliffe.
More reviews here
Movie comment on Captain America: The First Avenger
ikkegoemikke
"Whatever happens tomorrow, you must promise me one thing. That you will stay who you are, not a perfect soldier, but a good man."Since 2000 we are literally flooded with film versions of Marvel heroes. Just a small list: X-Men, Blade, Spider Man, Daredevil, The Hulk, The Punisher, Elektra, Fantastic Four, Ghost Rider, Iron Man, Thor, Wolverine, The Avengers, Guardians of the Galaxy ... Pretty impressive. And this year there's the release of "Captain America: Winter Soldier" of which I read so many good things everywhere. In preparation for this, I had to watch the first film from "Captain America" so I'll be proper prepared.
Captain America was introduced before World War II by Marvel and was immensely popular among the American troops. That's because he fought against the Nazis, the Japanese and other enemies of the U.S. After the 2nd World War he fought against communists during the Cold War. After that he sank into oblivion but was summoned back to join "The Avengers". Unlike other Marvel superheroes he doesn't have any super powers. He just has those immense muscles to defend himself with.
This movie takes place in 1942. Steve Rogers (Chris Evans) wants to join the army at all costs, to participate in defeating the Nazi regime in Europe. He is far too petite and has a whole catalog of illnesses. He is rejected while his good friend James "Bucky" Barnes (Sebastian Stan) is approved and about to leave to the front. At an exhibition Rogers attracts the attention of a certain Professor Erskine (Stanley Tucci) who makes him an offer: joining the secret project "Rebirth" where he'll receive injections and radiations with "Vita"-rays which will stabilize and activate the injected chemicals. His physical appearance changes quite dramatically. That thin, weak little boy changes into a healthy and muscular super soldier. Erskine has chosen him because he's sure that a weak person will continue to respect this gift and still will show compassion. "Because the strong man who has known power all his life, May lose respect for That power, but a weak man knows the value of strength, and knows ... compassion." But Steve Rogers is the only super soldier that mankind will know because professor Erskine is assassinated and thus the experiment can no longer be repeated.
The first half hour was funny and entertaining. The atmosphere of the 40's was beautiful integrated. A little bit sallow and with that 40's flair achieved by the costumes and decor. It really had that feeling of a pre-war film. The illusion they created seeing Chris Evans transforming from a toddler to an impressive person is wonderfully realized. Tommy Lee Jones (as the drill sergeant) and Tucci take care of some funny moments. Even the part where Captain America is used as a living billboard to attract new cannon fodder for the ongoing war, was reasonably entertaining. And then everything starts to look a bit ordinary and Captain America becomes a parody of itself. The transformation of a schmuck into an invincible someone is obviously something the audience loves to see, but the bland and cartooned second part puts a damper on that grandiose beginning.
The fight against the Nazi Johan Schmidt (Hugo Weaving) or Red Skull, who's in possession of some sort of cube from Odin (crucial in "The Avengers") which contains a super power that he wants to use to put the entire Nazi regime aside and conquer the world with, is initially enjoyable but eventually decays into a lousy action-movie. I thought it was a poor and incoherent story filled with asinine coincidences. The revue Captain America performs in, happens to move to Italy. Turns out his good friend "Bucky" is kidnapped by Red Skull and sits in the castle that the latter has taken over, to expand his organization "Hydra" and provide them with devastating weapons which work with the occult forces of the captured cube. But despite that almost invincible power, it really is a piece of cake for Captain America to sweep them together on a pile. He waltzes through it as if he is faced with an army of garden gnomes who are trying to defend themselves with tiny weapons. This really looked rather simplistic. One moment Red Skull inspects his troops and before you know it he's evacuating the castle in a panic, because Captain America came knocking on a door and a German porter on duty became acquainted with his legendary shield. The credibility of the story at that time was like the person Rogers was before he got those chemicals : weak, poor and meager. You can't call it exciting actually. And it's as predictable as the fact that Easter Monday will be this year again on a Monday.
The performances on the other hand are of an acceptable level. Chris Evans is superb as Captain America. The transformation of an insignificant schmuck into a savior and example of braveness for the American people, is simply sublime. Unfortunately his character eventually evolves into a third-rate action figure with an uninspired storyline. Tommy Lee Jones was again irresistible in a role that suits him. A humorless, moody loudmouth with a strong opinion and someone who says his unvarnished opinion. Hugo Weaving was perfect for the role as the dictatorial Nazi Schmidt and archenemy Red Skull. His grim facial features and demagogic madness made me forget to get irritated by his English with an exaggerated German accent.
But despite the fine performances, this Captain America was no more than an average action movie. No suspense and totally not impressive. Visually it didn't look that bad but the story was of a questionable level. Ultimately, it's only an introduction to the film "The Avengers." The only thing I could think of was "I hope the sequel isn't such a dull spectacle as this .....".
PS. However, I can tell you that the sequel is fantastic ...
More reviews here
Movie comment on Message from the King
ikkegoemikke
"It's Bianca. She's got a brother.He's in town, says he has what we've been looking for. He's out of control, Mike.
You told me Bianca was not a problem anymore. Bianca isn't a problem anymore. I'm afraid that's his problem."
Those who imagine the Los Angeles metropolis to be idealistically beautiful, they should adjust that view after watching "Message from the King". The less beautiful part of Los Angeles is used here. An impoverished neighborhood where the vast majority of residents live in poverty and where crime and drugs are an obvious part of society. Ash gray ghettos full of human suffering. And that's being emphasized by drizzly weather. The crowded mortuary is a reflection of these fading slums. A collection of nobodies who died because of an overdose, madness (drowned in a bathtub as an imaginary fish) and gang violence.
This is what Jacob King (Chadwick Boseman) faces when he arrives in L.A. The reason why he's staying in the city of angels is the sudden disappearance of his younger sister Bianca (Sibongile Mlambo). Soon he discovers the sore situation his sister got herself into and what it did to her : she earned a spot in the mortuary with a name tag on her big toe. The search for the murderers of his younger sister brings him in touch with all kind of figures. Trish (Natalie Martinez) the loyal neighbor points him in the right direction after which he meets a violent gang of Balkan criminals run by a certain Zico (Lucan Melkonian). Then there's the rich dentist Wentworth (Luke Evans) and the wealthy movie producer Preston (Alfred Molina). And let me tell you. Some of them are getting to know the bicycle chain he just bought, in a less pleasant way.
For Jacob, these L.A. neighborhoods probably still look like charming neighborhoods compared to where he comes from. His sister Bianca, his deceased brother Isaac and Jacob himself, lived the largest part of their life in South Africa in the Cape Flat townships, a sandy area south of Cape Town and better known as "Apartheid's dumping ground". A dilapidated community where gangs rule. Both in the slums and in prison. Such as "The Number Gangs". Isaac was a member of this notorious gang, until his death. Reason enough for Bianca to turn her back on her home country and to seek salvation in the United States.
You could say this movie is a cheaper version of "The Equalizer" with Boseman having an equal personality as Denzel Washington. A cold-blooded but alert person who has control over his violent eruptions and who accurately follows the traces to solve the criminal puzzle in the end. However, the ultimate motive remains quite mysterious. Perhaps the only minus I could find in this hard-core, ultra-dark movie. In fact, it's an ordinary revenge film that differs slightly from others because of its quirky atmosphere and tone. And afterwards I discovered the film was directed by a fellow countryman : Fabrice du Welz. Maybe that's why this movie displays a kind of willfulness.
Even though this action-flick is soaked by cliché elements (corrupt policemen, a cunning politician and a prostitute (Teresa "Lights Out" Palmer) who plays the Good Samaritan), you can speak of a stylish end product. No explicit violence scenes (the result is usually more explicit than the action itself) and a few star-like interpretations like that of Teresa Palmer. But especially Chadwick Boseman impressed. A man with few words, but hard negotiating techniques. From the very first instance, I was fascinated by him. In my opinion, this is yet again a rough diamond that simmers on Netflix undiscovered. Don't let anybody stop you from watching this when you bump into it somewhere, because this will surely surprise you.
More reviews here
Movie comment on Blended
ikkegoemikke
“I got a girl for you. A blond girl from my dance class.Slightly chubby. But when you start to move, all that is worth it.
That big woman can make you move like a hurricane”
Are you a sucker for romantic comedies? Or movies where everything goes wrong and in the end the whole situation miraculously falls into place? Or a film in which a rather geeky-looking daughter suddenly transforms into a fairy-like lady, after which some sad sack who at first didn’t have any interest, suddenly starts chasing her with his slobbering tongue to the floor? Or such a nonsense comedy with really lame jokes ? Even summarized they barely manage to conjure a smile on your face. Or are you looking forward to that particular film where again there’s someone in it with the name Dick, and you already know in advance what roguish jokes are about to be made? Hallelujah! Then “Blended” really is a movie that fits you because it includes all these features and you’ll save some time. No need to look for all the specific movies and see them all, because they (the geniuses) put everything in this movie. Brilliant.
Adam Sandler. Yes, popular in America. However, he’s not on my list of favorite comedians. I always feel as if he is reluctant to act and then makes up some insipid one-liners to satisfy everyone. A little smile here and there happens occasionally. But tears from laughing while watching a Sandler’s movie is nonexistent. I even think that a night of watching Sandler-movies could have a disastrous medical affect on me. Chronic diarrhea or a fit of hysterics …
“Blended” is such a predictable feel-good movie where two single people meet each other, can’t stand each other and find each other in the end, so everybody can fall in each others arms. A happy ending with a capital “H”. The chemistry between the two is absent at the beginning. Of course this is caused by a series of misunderstandings as you’ll notice afterwards. By a twist of fate (Dick turns out to have a lot of kids. Did you notice the subtle association between this fact and his first name ?) they both go on a trip to South Africa for a restful holiday with the whole family. That’s the first positive thing I can say about this movie. The images of this adventurous and primitive Africa are gorgeous. The African Savannah with its wildlife and its beautiful sunsets. But for such images I can turn on the TV and watch something like National Geographics.
To their surprise they bump into each other of course. They are required to share the same suite and also have diner together at the same table. Obviously at that table sits a typical couple that always appears in this type of film: one, probably divorced, noisy guy of mature age accompanied by a young wench with a bosom where there’s enough space for a few flower pots and therefore the need of a balcony is superfluous at the apartment. Of course these two attachments shake around a lot and is a joy for one of the two sons who’s in the “nude-magazines-under-the-bed” phase. And then we are ready for a series of embarrassing situations, childish fart jokes, endearing cuddles with cute teenage girls, the required human emotional bonding that develop gradually and a happy ending where everything falls into the fold.
The most annoying item in this film: the appearance of the African crooner Nickens all the time. Especially the one during the basketball game was really an embarrassment. They look like a bunch of Muppets, who pop up whether relevant or not and start singing a song related to the situation. I would have tied them to an elephant, cram a huge rocket in the butt of the elephant, light it real fast so it’ll disappear soon into the bush with that tricked orchestra.
Most positive thing in the whole movie: the appearance of Drew Barrymore. She acts as if it’s self-evident and looks so charming all the time. Not everybody is blessed with those qualities. She still has that sweet face like she had in “ET“. And I have to admit that Sandler and her make a cute couple.
I can be brief about Adam Sandler. He’s an imitation of himself. He plays the same character role in all his films over and over again : a clumsy pathetic guy who sounds sometimes boorish, but ultimately his dry humor and his seemingly fragile personality manages to please members of the female sex. A repetition in other words. And that’s something that is invariably misused in this film: endlessly repeating the same lame joke (bumping an innocent head, mispronouncing Sandler’s name …) until you want to scream to the screen “Yeaaaaah, we get it … ! “.
More reviews here
Movie comment on Wicked Blood
ikkegoemikke
“Lose not the Queen, for ten to one… if she be lost, the game is gone.”“Wicked Blood” is a standard mafia movie, but then on a smaller scale. The story of the teenage girl Hannah (Abigail Breslin) who’s being taken care of, after the loss of her parents, by her uncle Donny (Lew Temple), which has the appearance of Dr. Emmett Brown from “Back to the Future” but with too much “hillbilly crack” in his system. And then there’s also Uncle Frank (Sean Bean). Frank is the local bad guy and head of a mini gang of mobsters. Besides running a striptease tent he also has a lucrative business as manufacturer and supplier of crack. The one who assists him throughout the film is his somewhat crazy, retarded younger brother Bobby (Jake Busey). Apparently Bobby became slower after Hannah’s mother bashed his head with a baseball bat.
Hannah is a passionate chess player (something she probably inherited from Donny who once was State Champion) and she applies the rules of this game in her daily life. Thoughtful and with reason she performs every next move. Eventually, she devises a sophisticated plan to escape from this violent, drug-related world. Throw in an undercover agent, an assault on Hannah’s sister and the final revenge, and you have a complete picture of this standard crime film. A film with a story like there are already a thousand made of.
And yet it’s not an unpleasant film. And that’s thanks to Abigail Breslin who manages to give shape to the character Hannah in a natural and wonderful way. She reminded me of Saoirse Ronan repeatedly. She also has that innocent look, that determination and the all-pervading calmness. Maybe Ronan outclasses her a bit but only with a small lead. Despite the fact that the whole story is a bit exaggerated, improbable at times and thinking about it afterwards sometimes pretty laughable, the acting of Abigail Breslin was very convincing and plausible. A small, young girl only skilled in chess who goes to battle against a bunch of ruthless drug gangsters, who are not shy to liquidate someone who complains to much, is something that only could happen to Nancy Drew.
The one I enjoyed the most, was Lew Temple as the crazy, drug addicted low-life Donny. The chess games with Hannah briefly hinted a different picture of him though. That of a reasonably intelligent man who, because of past events and the current situation he is experiencing, recreated the individual as we see it now. The moments when he takes a shot (probably to check the quality) and starts to thrash about, accompanied by loud rock music, I found grandiose.
Sean Bean (Who I’ve recently saw in “CleanSkin“) looks like Boromir teleported into modern times. The same faraway look and stoic calmness he constantly shows. I expected him declaring a sentence like “One does not simply … steal my drugs” any moment.
Despite the mediocre storyline and some irritating (The city where it all takes place is apparently so deserted and desolate as a ghost town along Route 66. Totally no inhabitants to detect) and hilarious (The FBI infiltrating such a crappy,small gang.) moments, it’s still a movie you continue to watch. And that is merely due to the solid commitment of the actors and actresses.
More reviews here
Movie comment on Godzilla
ikkegoemikke
“Nature has an order. A power to restore balance. I believe he is that power.”Now this was a movie I was looking forward for so long already. This should have been a mega-movie that would beat the 1998 version in every way, with one’s hand tied behind one’s back. The 1998 “Godzilla” was for me a bit of a setback with a cardboard monster, terrible humorless acting and a “Jurassic Park” type of ending. With current technology, it should be possible to create a grandiose visual spectacle. But what a terrible disappointment it was eventually.
The first thing that flashed through my mind was that they could just as well have used the title “A tiny bit of Godzilla“. You’ll see the monster of monsters approximately 15 minutes. I have read here and there some arguments from Godzilla-hardcore enthusiasts that the movie remained faithful to the original Godzilla films and that the absence of the monster contributes to the build-up of tension. I hope they won’t generalize this technique in future films. Imagine the new “Tarzan” movie where you stare for half an hour at the adventures of Cheetah and finally Tarzan shows up the last 10 minutes to save the day. Or the new Spiderman. A crook destroys an American metropolis the entire movie, and Spidey just takes care of that the last 10 minutes. Or imagine “Jaws” made like this! After one and a half hour looking at a fin cutting through the seawater, the shark finally appears at the end and gets blown into smithereens. Exciting?
Not exactly. It’s more a “Santa-Clause” excitement that children experience. For them it’s also just waiting until that imaginary figure finally reappears in their country.
I admit,”Godzilla” is a film icon with a very rich history that I know little about. I didn’t know that this was already the 30th official movie. I only saw the 1998 version and a slightly older version of “King Kong Vs. Godzilla“. It’s still amazing how popular this creation has become. Godzilla has been around since 1954. A creature from the ocean that got such monstrous dimensions because of radioactive radiations. It was a resounding success and the “Showa“, “Heisei” and “Millenium” series were produced between 1954 and 2004 by Toho. The two American versions were both made under the watchful eye of Toho making sure that the rules of a Godzilla film were properly applied : part of the film must take place in Japan, Godzilla never kills people and it won’t die.
However, “Godzilla” better had followed a diet before showing itself. It looks ponderous and fat. Admittedly, it’s a lot better than the version in which a person plays it in a latex suit. But apparently the iconic monster really feasted on fat whales since his last appearance. Perhaps that’s the reason of his meager 15 minutes appearance. The burden of obesity, perhaps. That is the first frustration. The short screenplay that Godzilla gets. And that for the star player the movie is named after. And the moment it comes in the picture, it doesn’t get the full attention and has to share the spotlight with two other prehistoric giants. And there is annoyance number two. Those two look terribly bad. Almost like two metal monstrosities. But the sound they produce is seriously frightening and imaginative. This could be a personal touch by Gareth Edwards who gave in “Monsters” (as far as I can remember) the aliens also such a unique sound.
But my biggest frustration was that the entire film was covered in complete darkness and shades. I suppose the prehistoric monsters aren’t fond of sunshine (probably they are afraid to get extinct again) and therefore act when the sun goes down, and preferably when the rain is pouring down from the sky (The 1998 film had the same phenomenon). The entire film is shrouded in fog, dust and smoke. It’s sometimes really hard to distinguish something. The only bright moments were during human interactions. And that part of the movie was the most positive. The human aspect was of an acceptable level and proves the emphasis is on this and not on the creatures fighting each other.
Both Bryan Cranston (Joe Brody) as Aaron Taylor-Johnson (Ford Brody) did some brilliant acting. Joe is the desperate engineer who lost his wife in the past during a disaster at the nuclear power plant in Janjira. After enigmatic seismic activity the plant collapsed completely. 15 Years later Joe is still looking for the cause of this catastrophe. His son Ford, however, has put this behind him, lives in San Francisco and is an explosive expert in the U.S. army. His relationship with his father is at a low ebb. The father-son story with the known mutual blaming, isn’t really soggy and overdramatized, but shown in a convincing way. Also Ken Watanabe (Dr. Serizawa Ishiro) was the right man for the role of expert in the field of these prehistoric monsters. David Strathairn had to do the ungrateful part of the commanding Admiral. There’s always such a character in these kinds of movies : a pedantic military who always does what he thinks is best, regardless of the recommendations of the experts, until things really go wrong and then crawls back with his tail between his legs, begging for help.
The acting wasn’t bad. The action part was sufficiently present. And the special effects looked really splendid at times (if they were visible through the smoke and clouds). The main thing missing was the tension” (not the “Santa-Claus” tension). And what was too much present in here? Nonsensical actions and decisions. Why didn’t Joe empty his automatic rifle on the soft part of the MUTO? I would have done it. Twice there was an unlikely reunion amidst an immense crowd. And the fragment of the enormous bunker where nuclear waste was stored, was completely ridiculous! Of course nobody saw the huge crater behind the metal door …
For moviegoers who expect a movie with a gang of monsters bashing eachother brains, with clear images and nerve-racking tension, it’ll be a real setback. The Godzilla fans, who applause the “delayed appearing” and interpret it as tension, will surely enjoy it. I’m a little bit in between and still very disappointed. This new version isn’t what I expected, namely better than the 1998 version. Ultimately, it is just the same.
Fortunately, Godzilla is not that vengeful after all those nuclear bombs that they used against him in the past. He left San Francisco as a bull in a china shop and was kind enough not to damage Frisco more. Respect!
More reviews here
Movie comment on Cold in July
ikkegoemikke
"I need a drink and I haven't even had my coffee yet."Imagine. Your wife wakes you up in the middle of the night because she heard a suspicious noise. You get up and with trembling knees and a giant easter egg in your pants, you move along with a mega-gun in your shaking fist. And there's actually a burglar waving a flashlight in the middle of your living room. And in that very tense moment the antique grandmother-clock chimes. You scare and "BANG" the revolver goes off. The burglar will never have the urge again to go and buy cigarettes at the local supermarket. In other words, the brains he possessed aren't anymore where they should be. They have spread all over your living room. Obviously, this is seen as self-defense, and while the funeral is held, you are secretly watching while the victim is buried. Suddenly a dead-calm stranger stands next to you. He appears to be the father (and also ex-con) of the now brainless kid. In plain wording he lets you know he's not exactly happy with the death of his son. And before you know it, you are in a threatening situation in which your son is the main target. The following events however ensure that you end up in a bizarre situation and you're drawn into a death ride that defies all imagination.
And that's what happens to Richard Dane (Michael C. Hall) in this rather exciting and surprising movie. You can expect an exciting start compared to "Cape Fear". And when you've seen the end, you really believe that Jim Mickle got lessons from Quentin Tarantino. It's a gray, depressive and intense thriller complete with drizzling rain and bad neighborhoods with abandoned houses and dilapidated American Cadillacs. A story that is sometimes brutal and sometimes completely absurd. At times I doubted whether it was supposed to be a gritty,terrible life sketch or a cynical absurd comedy. A wonderful low budget film that begins with revenge, but slowly sheds a light on something disturbing. Nothing seems to be what it is and there's always another twist in this ominous story.
"Cold in July" is a morbid movie with a real threatening mood, violence of excessive proportions and a sickening event that causes the final outburst of extreme aggression. It's an adaptation of the eponymous book written by Joe Lansdale, the famed horror/thriller author. Michael C. "Dexter" Hall plays the lead role as Richard, a friendly, timid family man who earns his living as a frame maker. Because of my lack of interest in TV series, I had no idea that Hall was reasonably known as "Dexter." My mother in law was astonished that I didn't know him. He doesn't have the look of a seasoned rugged macho. But that was already evident after the confrontation with the burglar. But Hall knows how to interpret the transformation into a ruthless avenger in an unprecedented way.
Sam Shepard plays the part of Russel, the revenge seeking father. It seems as if he played in every movie I've seen recently (Out of the furnace, Mud, Killing them Softly, Safe House) and he's ideally suited for this role. The gray, weathered face,that raw raspy voice and his tough stance. It fits perfectly with the person Russel. And yet he shows in the end that there's still a bit of humanity inside him.
But for me the appearance of Don Johnson was a real surprise. He's the one who truly excels in this movie. When I see Johnson, I see Crockett from Miami Vice. I didn't see him acting anymore until "Django Unchained." But when he drove up in his bright red convertible with the swaying Hawaiian girl on the dashboard and that juicy Texas accent, I was hooked. A brilliant rendition of a pig farmer aka private detective, who can defend himself and gives his full support to Russel.
Visually it's very convincing at times. The dialog-free fragments are sometimes perfectly portrayed: scrubbing the wall in the beginning or the moments when they sit on the porch at Don Johnson's place. "Cold in July" is a mixture of different genres. It tries to surprise you again and again . The fact that it was a bit unbelievable how Richard Dane evolves from a typical wimp into a bloodthirsty ruthless basher is a slight detail. This was a fantastic experience and a must see for all fans of a rich suspenseful thriller.
More reviews here
Movie comment on Afflicted
ikkegoemikke
"This is not a disease! There is no cure! You have to kill to survive!"The moment "Afflicted" began, I sighed and thought to myself : "Please not again such a terrible found footage movie ..." Usually they look like a documentary with dreadful amateurish movie clips It always seems as if it is filmed by some grandmother who forgot that she has to push the red button again so it will stop recording. Afterwards when viewing the film, it's a series of mundane and monotonous blurry images which sway around all the time. Not exactly something you can charm me with.
Of course there are exceptions in this genre. The mother of all found footage films "Cannibal Holocaust" received a cult status. It was (I think) a movie that used this new element for the first time. David Carter's quote is actually the explanation of the principle: "The viewer feels as if they are there with the crew, experiencing the horrors with them". "The Blair Witch Project" led to the revival of this genre and became infamous (although that status was achieved because of the hype at that time about whether or not the images were authentic). "Cloverfield" and seemingly "Chronicle" are also memorable films. But unfortunately there are also terrible creations that only loyal supporters enchant like "The Dinosaur Project","The tapes","SX tapes","A night in the Woods "and "Evidence". It's a genre that I'm really not that fond about.
"The Afflicted" turned out to be quite a pleasant surprise for me. First the visuals weren't so bad and I didn't need to run for a pill of "Touristil" to counteract the upcoming seasickness. This is partly because Clif is a documentary filmmaker and uses a sophisticated film equipment. This looks all professional and that makes that the filming is of an exceptional quality. So no garden-and-kitchen camcorder was used, mostly resulting in terribly blurry and shaking images. And "First person shooter" fans know the camera position used. So if you regularly do a bit of fragging in "Call of Duty", "Halo" or "Far Cry", then you'll appreciate this footage.
In addition, a time-honored horror legend revived again in a fresh and sometimes humorous way. The first 30 minutes are not really exciting. And you can't speak of very spectacular acting. It seemed like a travelogue made by Derek (Derek Lee) and Clif (Clif Prowse), after they left on a world trip. Atmospheric images and beautiful panoramic views were edited in a rather wonderful way. Especially the images of "Cinque Terre" and "La Spezia" looked as if they came straight out of a promotional video of a travel agency. It's waiting for the beginning of the suspense. That's the thing you are waiting for eventually. And when you're a seasoned horror fan, then it must be something very special before it provides some excitement. Well the moment Derek starts getting the symptoms that indicates that something is not right, it became fascinating. A unique approach to the phenomenon Derek is suffering from. It's done in a humorous way (experimenting with his sudden powers and especially looking for the right way to satisfy his hunger was sublime) and sometimes in a scary way (the transformation, the pulsating veins all over his body, the threatening animal sounds and the way of moving). I realized that it wouldn't be a typical horror movie involving some paranormal activity, a gang of zombies, a pandemic caused by a virus or an old-fashioned ghost story. I think it's a creditable performance by the makers, to achieve this movie with the limited resources they had.
Conclusion: The beginning felt rather forced, but when Derek's mutations manifest (and I anxiously try not to give any spoilers away), a raw and frenzy story starts. Personally, I think it's a film that brings both the found-footage genre as the most ancient horror subject ever, to a higher level. The brilliant camera technique ensures that this low-budget horror looked outstanding. A driven, bloodthirsty and creepy horror in which seemingly a new superhero was created. It started as something funny and as a joke to splice a rock with bare fists, but soon it degenerated into a nightmare. For fans of the genre this is a "must see" and it is definitely a successful experiment in the "low-budget" section.
More reviews here
Movie comment on All Good Things
ikkegoemikke
"My father always said to only regret the things you didn't do not the things you did.""All good things" is a beautiful love story that slowly turns into a psychological drama and ends up as a mystery. A mystery that remains unsolved and ultimately has an open end as big as the Grand Canyon. It's based on true facts and reconstructed according to court documents. In reality, it was about Kathleen Durst, who's to this day still registered as a missing person. She was married to Robert Durst, son of a real estate mogul in New York. On January 31, 1982, the 29-year-old student from Manhattan, New York disappeared. And now, after all these years, they made this movie in which the main characters are given the names Katie and David Marks.
They managed to cast two big names for this movie who depict the turbulent love life in a recognizable and convincing manner. Kirsten Dunst played an outstanding poignant role as the lovable Katie who falls for the charming David, played by Ryan Gosling. Personally, I'm not so impressed with Gosling's previous acting. I was afraid I had to look at a straight face again the whole movie. A face where not a shred of emotion is detectable. But that turned out better than I was hoping for and throughout the whole movie Gosling showed a true pallet of all sorts of human emotions: joy, love, sadness, fear, pain and anger. Compared to the two movies "Drive" and "Only God Forgives", Gosling had a load of text to remember. A great interpretation. In particular, the gradual transition from a charming young man into a tormented, aggressive and introverted person was a well played act.
Ditto for Kirsten Dunst. She charms you from the beginning with her lovely appearance and highly endearing smile. The desperation that she shows after a certain time and the intense grief she has when she realizes that there isn't a possibility to escape this nightmare, is a beautiful rendition. It certainly is a more subtle role than just playing the girlfriend of Spiderman.
"All good things" starts obviously with all the good things that are part of human life. Meeting someone for the first time, flirting and the intense feeling of love, thinking about the future, wedding plans ... Everything peppered with joy and love. Life can't go wrong anymore. And then the pink cloud turns into a dark gray rainy cloud. The moment Katie brings up the subject of having children, it's radically rejected by David. This is the reversal in the passionate relationship that existed between these two lovers. And before you know it the atmosphere is ruined and the ghosts from the past are haunting him again. David turns into a depressed, moody and aggressive person. The gap between the two is growing by the day. It goes from bad to worse and Katie begins to explore the possibilities of a divorce. And then she disappears ... And that is until now still the case. Unresolved.
The moment the story changes from a touching romantic and emotional movie into a thriller full of mystery, I lost focus. It was suddenly all very absurd and confusing. The chemistry between David and Katie and the built up tension was wonderful to see. But the part about the disappearance and subsequent the judicial investigation with scattered fragments, was fairly vague. The only thing made clear throughout the film was the heavy burden resting on David's shoulders. David withdrawing himself in anonymity because the finger was pointed at him soon after, I can understand. But the masquerade and dressing up as a woman, was a bit too much and unexplained. Ultimately, it's a movie without a clear answer. But It couldn't be otherwise, since that's how it was in reality. And eventually you end up with even more questions than when the movie started! Actually it's a film that belongs in the category of "TV movies about unsolved disappearances" as "The Lindbergh Kidnapping Case" with Anthony Hopkins. A banal movie you can watch again on a rainy Saturday night on a TV-channel.
More reviews here
Movie comment on Holy Ghost People
ikkegoemikke
“Bless your name, holy Jesus.Satan’s sheddin’ big ol’ tears tonight.
He’s a big boy, ain’t he? I call him Satan, ’cause he’s so big and mean.
It’s these deadly serpents the Lord sent us to handle… without fear.
Our hearts are filled with the Holy Ghost.
Get on up here, Brother Cole. Satan wants to talk to you.”
“Holy Ghost People” isn’t really a horror, even if the movie poster looks like it and it’s a pretty macabre theme. It’s more a thriller in which the creepy part is manifested through the religious sphere. Or you get the shivers already by looking at some poisonous rattlesnakes.
What makes this movie eerie is the fact that it’s indeed still possible that an individual who’s charismatic and has the talent to preach in a convincing way, can manipulate a bunch of people so that they follow him blindly and firmly believe in what this indoctrinating figure proclaims. A person with a seemingly clear mind who tries to convince others that he’s talking the truth (however it’s usually a twisted truth). Regardless if what he’s preaching is based on Biblical or other religious texts or that this is simply improvised and full of hollow words. And he usually speaks to people who have physically and emotionally difficulties, or are recovering from a particular setback, and actually are in need and looking for a glimmer of hope and a last resort to hold on to. History has already shown the effect of such figures and what they can cause. And without going into a religious debacle here, I’m convinced that most of the global problems are rooted in the religious aspect of human life. And that’s something that scares a lot of people already. Enough said!
Holy Ghost People
Charlotte (Emma Greenwell) is an ordinary waitress in a local bar in a godforsaken American town near the Appalachians. She’s looking for her sister Liz who she has thrown out years ago because of a persistent drug addiction. The last thing she knows about Liz is that she has joined a cult called “The Church of the One Accord” somewhere in the mountains. She asks help from the Afghanistan veteran Wayne (Brendan McCarthy) who’s suffering from PTSD and has an alcohol problem and who she helped one night. At first he’s rather reluctant until Charlotte waves some dollar bills in front of his eyes. Before you know it they are attending a service with this religious group and they meet the phlegmatic and charismatic figure Billy (Joe Egender) who looks like he walked away from a 60s movie and you expect him to sing a rock song any moment. A true religious crooner. He emphasizes his message by using poisonous rattlesnakes. They are the symbol of the eternal struggle between God and the devil. Charlotte and Wayne soon realize that Liz is not present and Charlotte goes to investigate. Before they know it, however, they are caught in the web of the dangerous religious Brother Billy and his henchmen.
Holy Ghost People
Ultimately, this wasn’t bad movie in the beginning. The gloomy atmosphere was constantly present and even at times it was pretty exciting. The images mounted in between from the eponymous documentary made by Peter Adair in 1967, made sure that the lurid and creepy atmosphere was maintained. The performances are the strongest part of this movie. It’s the denouement that’s the weak point. Especially Joe Egender I thought was fantastic and did some strong acting. He really came across as an evil and manipulative person with his loud-sounding voice and the way he spoke to his followers in a hypnotic way. A true wolf in sheep’s clothing. Satan in person. Brendan McCarthy and Emma Greenwell were very convincing as the by chance created couple. McCarthy, ravaged by alcohol and who actually preferred to drive back. He’s a character who cares about nothing. Greenwell tries to unravel the puzzle on her own. They truly did their best in a convincing way.
Holy Ghost People
But then the movie turns into a complete mess and ends in a disappointing way. The entire buildup is fabulous and is negated by the uninspired denouement. Why couldn’t they just simply ask about the presence of Liz? Despite their aversion and indifference about that religious stuff, they still let themselves immerse. It also seemed strange to me that they could feel from the outset that there was a certain danger when staying in this closed community.
Holy Ghost People
In a certain way this was a scary and creepy movie about the deterrent of fanatical sects. A succession of extreme religious brainwashing where self-punishment is a method of self-purification. A crazy ritual encouraged by a dogmatic person. There are several films about such cults (and this one is definitely better than “Red State“). And because it is strange and incomprehensible for “normal” people this can lead to confusion and even fright, as the unknown frightens. So don’t expect gory scenes and ghastly moments. For genre fans, it’s a film that’s worth watching.
More reviews here
Showing items 226 – 250 of 630