A British BBC TV documentary directed by Jim Nally.
A pair of Swedish twin sisters run out into traffic on a highway. They resist police and medical workers. One of them is released, only to go and kill a man.
Great story, poor production. The duration was far too long for the short story that it was about. My film director senses were tingling from all the filler material. Information density was extremely sparse, with heavy narration lengthening eye-witness reports by an obscene amount. Only some of the interviewees had anything at all to do with the story. Who is this psychologist guy? Not the psychologist hired by the defense or prosecution in the case. Hence, he doesn't matter. The subject matter was initially riveting. After the "motorway/carriageway" incident, it became much less interesting. The footage was pitiful. A few security cameras caught these women on video, there were a few interviews and the rest was filler. Audio was extremely normalized for TV, so everything sounded great to me. The modern television style calls for a catchy intro, followed by fluff and filler. This was adhered to religiously. I rate this bad. It didn't hurt to watch, but a few minutes of google search could pull up something better.
An Australian adventure directed by Zak Hilditch.
The end of the world is drawing near and a man leaves his girlfriend to go to a party. He encounters obstacles on the way and ends up saving a little girl from being tortured. Together, they look for her parents.
With all of the post-apocalyptic cinema of late, pre-apocalyptic stories should be told as well. The dynamic pacing of this really helped. It sped up during action and slowed down to allow thought. The 2 main characters were a good team and their stories gave the supporting cast something to latch onto, like puzzle pieces fit together. The dialogue and acting were very emotional. Even the tough hero showed lots of emotional sensitivity. The only real "set piece" in this was the bunker at the party. Everything else was just well-chosen locations. Camera-work and editing looked good. Most scenes had a warm, bright "summer in the desert" look to the color balance. I won't spoil the only special effect at the end. Audio was not bad, but of the style of the time. IMDb rates it 6.7/10, metacritic has a METASCORE of 61% and Rotten Tomatoes rates it 82% TOMATOMETER and 64% AUDIENCE SCORE for an average of 68.5%. I would say that a D is grading slightly low for this. For the 2 main characters and the spot-on pacing, I rate this adequate. You might want to check it out.
An Australian adventure directed by David Michod, starring Guy Pearce and Scoot McNairy.
A man's car is stolen by 3 men. He finds the brother of one of them, who leads him to them and his car.
Pointless! The slow pacing made this seem to take forever to tell no story. The characters were all rough guys, even the woman doctor was tough. There was a definite lack of dialogue and what was said was lost between modern audio practices and thick Aussie accents. Australia has a whole outback full of desert and dirty clothes are easy, so that covers sets and costumes. If I have anything good to say about this it's the camera-work. Everything looks like it was shot professionally. In audio, I already covered dialogue. Loud music and sound effects almost go without saying. This won 10 of 31 awards it was nominated for. 9/10 of those were for best sound! IMDb rates it 6.4/10, metacritic has a METASCORE of 64% and Rotten Tomatoes rates it 66% TOMATOMETER and 51% AUDIENCE SCORE (I shit you not, those are the letter cases from their websites) for an average of 61.25%. I agree completely and give it an F too for Fucking pointless award-winning trash. I rate this bad. DO NOT WATCH!!!
A Japanese anime series directed by Shinichiro Watanabe.
A pair of bounty hunters travel through space, looking to earn money by turning in criminals. They pick up a dog, a woman who has forgotten her past and a young computer genius to accompany them.
This was much slower paced and more deeply thoughtful than most other anime in the shonen/funimation genre. 26 episodes seemed too short because I liked it (having watched some episodes when it originally aired on TV). The plots were mostly single-episode, but some spanned 2 episodes and there was a general plot/timeline that all of the episodes existed in. I liked the characters and cared what happened to them. My favorite was comedic relief, Ed. All of the dialogue was written very much in-character and the English voice actors did a great job. The animation style was mostly traditional anime cartoon, but I think that there was some computer work done somewhere in there. Everything was drawn expertly and in great detail. Audio seemed to be mixed correctly. Given the musical name of the series, there was a heavy metal episode, but I would have liked more of that kind of theme-ing done with different genres. T.H.E.M. anime reviews gave it 5/5 as did Kyle Mills of DVD Talk. However, I would hesitate to give it a perfect score. Nonetheless, I did like it quite a bit and rate the series good. This would be one to watch.
An Australian science fiction directed by Shane Abbess, starring Temuera Morrison.
A fighter pilot has left his daughter at home when a crisis breaks out. His aircraft crashes after an aerial battle and he must find his way to rescue his daughter.
Definitely entertaining. I'm not mentioning duration anymore unless it strays from the hour and a half norm. This did not. The pacing was amazingly fast for a non-Hollywood film, but I guess that would be a sign of the times (pun intended). There was always something happening and the editing cuts were usually very quick. The plot held my interest all the way through, although some elements were a little stale. I did care what happened to the characters, but some of them seemed marked for death from the start. I thought the writing and dialogue were done very well. The little girl's narration really sold it to me. Some people don't like narration, but I think it can be beneficial. The acting was good as well. Sets and costumes looked very convincing. The city looked like a city, jail like a jail and desert outposts were sincere. What I really liked were the monsters. I don't know if it was costume or special effects, but it worked. Besides fast editing, the camera-work looked good. I could see everything that was going on and exposures were excellent. There were lots of digital special effects: spaceship battles, explosions, views of impossible places... and it all looked real enough for my tastes. audio was not too shabby. I could hear dialogue, the music was a little low and sound effects were a little loud. The future desert theme will always remind me of Tank Girl (1995). IMDB has this rated at 5.6/10, Rotten Tomatoes has 63% tomatometer with 45% audience score and metacritic has 55% METASCORE for an average of 54.75%. That is called a failing grade where I come from, but I saw no failure when I watched it. What I saw was a film that fits the standard for modern science fiction. I rate this good because it was entertaining, full of action and I liked the monsters.
An Australian mystery thriller directed by Peter Weir, starring Richard Chamberlain.
A lawyer takes on the case of some aboriginal men accused of murder and finds that his dreams have something to do with their beliefs.
This was alright. The hour and 39 minute duration seemed sparsely populated because the content happened at a relatively slow pace. The plot was almost interesting, but fell just short of really holding my attention. I thought the characters seemed a little bit shallow or poorly written. The dialogue and acting seemed just short of being good too. The main character had a habit of reaching out and touching people he was talking to. costumes and locations seemed to fit and I liked the final set (not spoiling). Most of the special effects were "dream" editing like stuff appearing and disappearing, but the black rain looked a little fake. It seemed to only be raining black on the main character's car windshield. As with most audio, the music was too loud and the dialogue too quiet. I think that the style of this set the stage for films like The Omen (1976), Stigmata (1999) and The Ninth Gate (1999). It's not a bad genre, just not really what interests me. I rate this adequate.
An American science fiction directed by Luigi Cozzi, starring Christopher Plummer and David Hasselhoff.
An evil count threatens peace in space with a giant weapon. A pair of adventurers must find a crashed ship and defeat him.
Beautifully hokey! The hour and a half duration flew by because of the absurd style. The plot was not written or communicated very well, but ran along the lines of a general heroic adventure story. The shallow characters fit this film very well, but would have been a detriment to any other piece. Dialogue and acting seemed like a "let's get this in one take" situation was happening. Like the plot, they were not written well. I thought the sets and costumes fit together very nicely. Everything was very colorful and bold. Camera-work was predictable, but showed what was going on decently. The shot compositions looked more like 1940s than 1970s. I'm thinking The Thief of Bagdad (1940). Same goes for the compositing work. Some people would say that the special effects were a joke, but I found that joke highly amusing. I would not want good special effects for this. The tiny models and sloppy compositing pretty much made the film for me. Audio was not too shabby. I could hear everything, but the music was mixed way too loud at some points. I would best describe the style as akin to Flash Gordon (1980) and Barbarella (1968). IMDB gives it 3.9/10, AllMovie has a 1.5/5 AllMovie rating with 3/5 user ratings and Rotten Tomatoes has 33% tomatometer with 38% audience score for an average of 40%. Although I agree that this is not classy or refined, it has such innocent charm that I would argue for a better grade. I rate it awesome. Only watch this if you know what I'm talking about and agree that B movies can be more fun than Hollywood blockbusters when seen from the correct perspective.
An Australian science fiction thriller directed by Michael and Peter Spierig, starring Ethan Hawke.
A writer walks into a bar and tells their life story to the bartender. The bartender then produces a time travel device and the plot gets strange.
This was pretty interesting for a few reasons. The hour and a half duration seemed too short to me because it left me wanting more. Pacing was relatively quick, but probably slower for the time period. The plot held my interest throughout, but the ending was inconclusive. Hence, why I wanted it to be longer. There was some ambiguity in characters, but that made it more interesting and ending more frustratingly inconclusive. I cared what happened to the people/person in the film and their story was developed. The dialogue and acting seemed natural and there was some narration in scenes when the story was being told which benefited the plot. Sets and costumes fit the varying times depicted, but mostly by being generic. Those that were more stylized almost looked out of place in contrast. I really liked the camera-work. There was good focus and exposure, but the compositions tended to be more centralized than I would have liked. Color correction/grading was done artfully and most of the scenes had a warmer color balance. The special effects were minimal and only happened at time jumps. Audio was of the time, but had a relatively good mix. Although the music and sound effects were louder than dialogue, I could hear what everyone was saying. This won 11 awards out of 30 nominations. IMDB rates it 7.5/10, Rotten Tomatoes has 84% tomatometer with 75% audience score and Metacritic has a 69% metascore for an average of 75.75% C grade. I disagree, arguing that it deserves a B+ at least. The interesting plot, good camera-work and artful color grading lead me to rate it awesome despite the inconclusive ending. Watch it!
An Australian science fiction directed by Ben C. Lucas.
A woman runs a company that uses drugs and technology to give people memories. She has a brother in a coma and a father who doesn't believe in her work. Her boyfriend dies when he takes the wrong potion and she is sentenced to a year of imprisonment in her own technology.
Unoriginal. The hour and a half duration is pretty standard and it had dynamic pacing that changed with the plot. I thought the plot was inconclusive and that it was unclear to the viewer what was fantasy and reality. The characters were relatively shallow and secondary to the plot. Dialogue all sounded natural and the actors did fine. The laboratory sets looked good, but the fantasy experience sets and locations looked better. I think this was because of more creative camera usage and editing. The special effect of going into an experience was a kaleidoscope made with video from the upcoming shot. There were also some distortions based on variations of the same effect when an experience was glitching. Audio was standard of the time: low dialogue, medium music and loud sound effects. IMDB rates it 6.3/10 and Rotten Tomatoes has 62% audience score for a 62.5% average. I disagree. This was better than Midnight Special for visual effects and plot. I rate this adequate.
An American science fiction directed by Jeff Nichols, starring Michael Shannon, Joel Edgerton, Kirsten Dunst and Sam Shepard.
A boy with special powers is on his way to a certain place with his father. They previously belonged to a religious cult and are also being tracked by the government.
This was modern American mediocrity on display. I thought that an hour and 46 minutes was too long for so little to happen. The plot was so simplistic that it really should have been shorter. There was very little development of characters either forward through the plot or in development of back-stories. The dialogue was written relatively well and the actors gave convincing performances. Sets/locations and costumes would best be described as mundane. Camera-work seemed decent because I could see everything that was happening. Some shots looked good, but it wasn't anything special. The special effects were all digital (a standard of modern American mediocrity) and looked convincing, but again, not extraordinary. The audio was not so great. I thought that music and sound effects were mixed to high and dialogue mixed too low, but again, that is another Hollywood standard. IMDB gives this 6.6/10, Rotten Tomatoes has 83% tomatometer with 67% audience score and MetaCritic rates it 76/100 for and average of 73%. I agree with the C- grade because it wasn't bad, but wasn't good either. I rate this o.k.
An Italian horror adventure directed by Ruggero Deodato.
Oil prospectors land a plane in South America to find the team who are supposed to meet them have been killed. One of them is captured by a native tribe and escapes with a woman.
I can see the roots of Cannibal Holocaust forming in this film. The hour and 26 minutes went by quickly with lots of action and quick editing pace. There were some areas of the plot that were vague or important information in "blink and you miss it" sections. The B-roll also got out of control a few times. The characters were not deeply developed and did not have extensive back-stories, but that is not what this film was made for. The sparse dialogue seemed fine to me and the acting was done well. I think that the acting of fear and pain came through realistically. The sets or location looked like a real jungle with caves to my eyes and there was a definite lack of costumes. Most folks were naked. Visually, the film resides between Cannibal Ferox and Cannibal Holocaust. Ferox was lo-fi and Holocaust was HD, with this somewhere in the middle. What some may see as special effects in this turned out to be real. Yes, those are actual animals being mutilated. The audio was all extremely loud. Animal sounds and pre-Cannibal Holocaust Umbaldo Continello (not Riz Ortolani) music will let you know for sure what Ruggero made 3 years later. Stylistically, I would lump this in with Cannibal Holocaust and Cannibal Ferox in the "good cannibal films" group just for shock value alone. IMDB has this rated at 6.2/10, AllMovie has 1/5 AllMovie rating with 3.5/5 user ratings and Rotten Tomatoes has a 52% audience score for a 51% average. Apparently, not everyone sees the merit of shock value. I rate this good because I do see that merit.
An Italian slasher horror mystery directed by Mario Bava, starring Luigi Pistilli and Leopoldo Trieste.
People... at a bay... murder. That was the plot.
This looks like the work of Jess Franco. Gruesome death scenes and a naked swimming scene would seemingly suggest that it was his work. An hour and 23 minutes was a very long time to watch a plotlessly rambling video about murder. If I were to interpret credits from past experience, the producer would be Jess Franco and writer would be Nathan Explosion (from Dethklock). Characters aren't worth mentioning because there were so many and they all die. Brigitte Skay's nude swimming earns female anatomy points right before she dies. I couldn't hear much dialogue, but the acting seemed just short of sincere. The narrative sections of this and "B-roll" sections seemed to be filmed by separate camera operators. The narrative looked like crap, but the B-roll was beautiful! There was a sunset across a lake, selective focus, deep focus, good exposure and composition... Special effects were all physical: blood, severed limbs, severed head, floating corpse, multiple impalements (obviously written by Nathan Explosion). The audio was spotty. All of the dialogue was whispered to microphones that were placed too far away and behind the actors. If it was dubbed, this is THE WORST voice-over work EVER. IMDB rates this 6.7/10 and Rotten Tomatoes has 80% tomatometer and 64% audience score for a 70% average. I think that gives this a little too much credit. I rate it poor. Graphic murder and nudity inclusion elevate it from bad.
A Chinese kung fu romantic comedy directed by Sammo Hung and Corey Yuen, starring Jackie Chan.
A lawyer is working on a court case involving a woman who owns a fish farm that is being polluted by a nearby factory. The lawyer calls in 2 friends and they try to distract the women with romance.
It seems like this was trying to be everything and ended up as nothing. The hour and a half duration seemed long, mostly because I'm having a really crappy day when everything is problems. The plot was a little too convoluted for a kung fu flick and full of cliches from the genre, location and time. The characters did not impress me, except Mr. No Eyebrows at the end (image). He's the only non-Asian in the entire film! I think that much of the verbal humor was lost in translation during the absolutely horrid dubbing process. Physical humor remained and the team of Sammo Hung and Jackie Chan do a great job at that. The sets and costumes looked professional. Camera-work and editing looked textbook-perfect like Home Alone (1990). However, that does not include creativity or surprise. It was all very predictable and straight forward. There was just enough kung fu to classify it in the genre, but romance took priority over fighting. What fighting there was looked very much like the style of the 2 main stars, for obvious reasons. As I mentioned before, the dub was bad, but the audio quality was not. The dialogue was a little low in some sections and the kung foley was a little loud, but not annoyingly so. IMDB has this at 7.3/10, AllMovie rates it 1.5/5 AllMovie rating and 4/5 user ratings and Rotten Tomatoes has a 79% audience score. 65.5% is so close to getting an F that it can feel F's breath on the back of its neck. I agree with this average. Wikipedia says that this sucked because the actors played out of character to the point that a woman poisoned herself at the film production company's office. It's not worth poisoning oneself over a crappy movie though. I rate this poor. You probably should not watch it.
An American mystery directed by Robert Hammer, starring Denise Galik.
A pair of police detectives are trying to catch a serial killer who strangles women.
For a "video nasty", this was dull and tame. An hour and 32 minutes went by a little slowly while watching these detectives. The plot seemed to be stretched out thinly over more time than it took to tell the story, with inconsequential scenes thrown in as filler. The shallow detective characters reminded me of the classic 1970s detectives like in All the President's Men (1976). The killer was clearly not an actor, but fit the part. It seemed to me that there was too much footage of him lifting weights with his shirt off. Fortunately (the only positive aspect), female characters spend about as much time with their shirts off too, gaining some serious female anatomy points. Dialogue and acting are not where this film shines (as if it did at all). Let's call the dialogue cliche and the acting unconvincing at best. Costumes and locations looked convincing, but still had that 1970s vibe. I didn't notice any good camera-work. What I did notice were under-exposures, lack of lighting and a generally flat look. The audio was the worst part of this. I heard way too much dead air, way too loudly between sections of dialogue and music. IMDB gives this 4.9/10 and Rotten Tomatoes has a 17% audience score for it, giving this a 33% average. I tend to agree: this was a horrible film. I rate it bad. DO NOT WATCH!
An American horror slasher directed by James Bryan.
A group of young people go camping and are chased by a wild man who wants to kill them.
The real horror of this film is it's poor production quality. An hour and 20 minutes passed very slowly. This was partially because of the slow pace, with long shot lengths. The stale and simplistic plot really failed to hold my interest. Characters were shallow, poorly acted and poorly written. Apparently, the filmmaker used outdoor locations to save on lighting costs and it shows. Camera-work consisted mainly of hand-held follow shots, but there were a few better compositions when a tripod was used. All of the special effects were physical and mostly consisted of blood (the film's main expense). I have heard worse audio in films, but not very frequently. It was all annoying noises, including the music and dialogue. DVD Talk gave this 1.5/5, Dread Central gives it 2/5, IMDB has it at 3.6/10, Rotten Tomatoes has 13% tomatometer and audience score and has 1/5. An average of 25.3% seems about right to me. I rate this bad because it was unpleasant to watch.
A Japanese anime directed by Hayato Date.
A misbehaving orphan boy goes through ninja training and is sent on missions with his peers.
220 episodes of Naruto is a little bit much for anyone over 20 years old. The fast pace held my interest though. The basic premise of the plot allows some writing freedom and was rich with side-plots. I don't think I've ever hoped for the death of the main character sooner or more continuously than while watching this. Everyone else was relatively deep in comparison to this brash little crap-hole. The humorous episodes of side-plots are what I like about anime is series format and this was no exception. My favorite comic relief was Jiraiya, the "Pervy Sage" and Naruto's supposed sensei. Naruto's dialogue immediately irked me with his repeated phrase, "Believe it!" but that stopped soon enough that I could finish watching the series. Shikamaru always says everything is "a drag". Otherwise, the dialogue and acting were not bad. Too many flashbacks is where this series really went awry. There were even flashbacks within flashbacks during decisive battles. It was a real drag. The animation looked more computerized than Inuyasha, but retained the hand-drawn traditional form. Some of it also looked a little bit lazy and repetitive, but I would have done the same thing if I were animating over 200 episodes of something. I liked the audio for the most part. Naruto and Gaara's English voice actors were not to my liking and the music was a little repetitive. It was good music, though. The Oroshimaru theme reminded me of the intro to Michael Jackson's Thriller and there was some fast rock/metal for battles. The style of the series as a whole seemed a little juvenile to me, but this is a cartoon made for teen boys. It's supposed to be that way. Overall, it was just slightly less good than Inuyasha (which I rated good). This makes Naruto adequate.
An American Syfy action horror directed by Kevin O'Neill, starring Roger Corman.
A prehistoric shark melts off of a glacier and attacks the coast of Mexico. A young man and his friends must stop it.
I knew this would be trashy when I turned it on. An hour and 26 minutes went by pretty quickly with the fast pace. I found the plot to be stale, regurgitated and recycled. Who has not seen a film about a monster in water before? I did not care about the characters. It's not that I disliked them, just could not be bothered to concern myself with their welfare. Dialogue was written pretty poorly. Some of it reminded me of a soap opera (more on that later). QActing was obviously not a full-time job for any of the cast. The locations actually looked good. There was a variety of city, estuaries, beach, marina, open water that fit together, forming a cohesive overall location. Some of the camera-work reminded me of a soap opera as well. There was a scene at a bar in the beginning when some people leave and one guy sighs before the shot cuts. Special effects were what would be known as "budget style". Everything about the shark was done on a computer. there were very few physical effects of torn up victims, like a cast head floating next to a boat. Audio seemed pretty on to me. Being broadcast on cable TV, it needs to be more even than a theater film. Style brings me back to soap operas again. The color correction, high gain/grain, shot compositions and editing all looked like something from daytime TV. Chicago Now gave it 1/5, IMDB has it at 3.2/10 and Rotten Tomatoes has a 20% audience score. 24% average is not something to be proud of. I thought it was cheesy enough, but not quite sleazy enough. I rate it tolerable because it was entertaining by being hokey, but total trash otherwise.
