Change Your Image
dalbrect
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
Dancer in the Dark (2000)
Insulting melodrama threaded out by the stupidity of main character
Seriously, a 7.8 on IMDb? My wife and I got roped into this from a fairly interesting summary: A woman losing her sight turns her reality into musical numbers as her life spins out of control. Little did we know that every single awful thing that happens to her is because of her own stupidity.
Actually, I can't blame the character - I think she was losing her mind along with her sight (it's the only explanation for her moronic behavior) - but I sure as heck blame the director. NO ONE acts like this Bjork character. Covering up for the guy who stole your kids eye surgery money because he made you promise not to tell anyone about his money problems? Even when you are on trial for his murder? Even when he begged you to kill him because he's a scum who steals from a blind woman? PREPOSTEROUS. I would've made the leap of illogic if she would've sprouting wings and flew into the air. But this? Come on!
This has to be one of the most insulting movies to the intelligence of film audiences everywhere. All that was lacking from the forced emotional suffering of this character was having her dog get run over by a car because she forgot to put on the hand-brake or something. There was no dog but I really don't know why the director didn't throw that cheap-shot in as well. Something to do with Animal Cruelty laws in Europe or something? It's the only explanation.
Blech, I just had to vent something about this awful film but I refuse to go deeper. I think a quick scan of some other comments will provide you with a body of evidence to avoid this one. The one star reviews are the only legitimate entertainment you'll get out of this disaster.
Gwoemul (2006)
Undeserved Hype - a snooze-fest at best
Don't be deceived as I was by the 'glowing' reviews quoted on the DVD box. "Wildly entertaining.", "a seriously scary freakout.", and the worst of all, "ON PAR WITH JAWS." This movie is none of the above.
Normally I don't bother with writing bad reviews for films but I can't believe this one is resting at a comfortable 7 on IMDb. It doesn't deserve it.
After a so-so opening daylight attack by a monster created by, what else, chemicals dumped by lazy scientists, this movie goes absolutely nowhere and it goes there sloooowly. Basically and improbably, a girl is snagged by the monster (I'll give them points for a good creature design but this ain't no WETA creation) and her semi-comical family spend an hour-and-a-half tracking her down...in the sewers surrounding the Han river. Their search lacks any suspense-again, someone called this on par with Jaws?-and by the time they find her you realize it was all pretty much pointless. Other than that, a big bulk of the movie is committed to a government quarantine that culminates in one funny scene involving a guy spitting in a gutter in front of a crowded bus stop.
Blech. This was bad. I'm not kidding. You want to see a rotten monster movie? Rent Deep Rising. At least you'll save 30 minutes of your life.
Lucky (2004)
Ambition on a budget that should deliver but doesn't
Honestly, I was a little surprised when I came here and found that this movie had won a couple of awards. I pulled it off the shelf because I'd read a couple of good reviews on horror web-sites and I'm always up for something a little different. After watching the film, I can't help but think that the praise and the awards come from the fact that it is a decent effort whose low budget rarely shows in the production. With really good horror films a rarity, especially when you discount the teen-beat cash-cow flicks that hollywood cranks out, a movie like Lucky seems better than it really is because at least it tries to do something different, with "natural" actors, without relying on cliches and market research. Still, Lucky doesn't cross the line of cleverness that really would have made this one special. Throwing in a talking dog that helps you and then wants you to kill is the premise that sold me on this film but as it turns out it doesn't deliver. It's ok, with maybe a little too much graphic abuse to women, and you've seen it all before. But hey, at least they tried and if you ever sat around dreaming of making a low-budget horror movie you wouldn't fault yourself by watching Lucky and taking some notes.
And now a little bit of commentary that requires spoilers:
*SPOILER* The demonic talking dog actually works in this film. They don't use a cartoony voice for the Lucky (which, in the context of the film would have worked since the narrator is a cartoonist) but instead use a velvety, street-savvy voice and this really helps add a sinister edge to the creature. What doesn't work is the fact that the film boils down the hallucinations of a serial-killer which you expect from the first ten-minutes. The evil dog could have been a toaster by the end of this film for all it mattered and that really is too bad. It's not often you get such a silly image of evil in the guise of a cute little dog and when you got it working you have to run with it. A lot of potential lost here.
Bones (2001)
70 minutes of a good movie
While I can't be certain that Bones went under the studio knife for a little test-screening cosmetic surgery, I sure am suspicious. The first two thirds of the movie deliver old fashioned, 80's-style horror goods with decent character development, a nice history lesson as to why Jimmy Bones is so hacked-off, and some juicy gore. This movie even has a good reason for the heroes to stick around in a haunted house (please, no more horror movies about scientific research groups studying the supernatural). By the time Bones awakens and starts killing those who wronged him, the film has settled into a tight, supernatural revenge flick with a nod to the blaxploitation genre.
Then, oh man, then the film goes horribly wrong. All subtlety flies out the window as the relatively creepy 'hood' setting is replaced with a trip to a "city of dead" that looks like an rejected set from the worst Nightmare on Elm Street movie. What's even worse is that there is no allusion to the "city of the dead" in the entire movie until the scene before our heroes bumble into it.
This glaring shift of setting is made worse by the sudden inclusion of corny, corny attempts a humor--talking decapitated heads complaining about their hair?--and a silly ending. In fact, the last twenty minutes even seem like they were directed by someone else. Imagine watching Se7en, with all its creepy direction and atmosphere, only to have it end like it was directed by Joel Schumacher.
Bones is no Se7en but after a healthy start, it deserved better.
Phantoms (1998)
Kootz should have included "movies" in his contract with satan.
I am consistantly stunned at how bad a job hollywood does at translating Koontz's books to film. Between this one and "Watchers" I have made a solid pact to never see another Koontz adaptation again. ***Spoilers*** I'll be brief: Imagine going to visit you grandma in a remote mountain town and discovering that the entire population is missing. Once you find one of the former denizens, they are swollen and bloated and quite dead. From there your nightmare only gets worse as 'something' lurks around the town... How's that sound? Ok? Well go read the book. Sometimes a movie can almost work as Cliff Notes; here it is only Cr*p Notes.
Trilogy of Terror (1975)
I rated it a 5 but the last segment deserves better
I saw this show on TV when I was about seven years old and the evil totem-doll in the last segment stayed with me for years. Upon a new viewing, I realized there were two other segments in the show that I had completely forgot. This is totally understandable since their quality hovers somewhere below an the worst episodes of the old "night gallery" series. Ah, but the last tale is a true gem of TV-horror. Simple story: an African Totem/Doll arrives in the U.S. and begins terrorizing the poor lass who receives it. What sets this one apart is the truly ugly Doll and a nifty ending. As far as TV-horror goes, this is as good as it gets.
Cast Away (2000)
A strangely unsatisfying journey of isolation and return.
First off, I'm using the previews for Cast Away's as a guideline for not revealing any of the film's plot. The sad thing is that the previews pretty much show everything that happens in the film. If by some chance, you missed them, they basically show Tom Hanks, a Fed-Ex worker, going down in a plane crash and then getting stuck on a deserted island only to return years later. This is an exciting premise, the idea of a fast-paced worker from fast-paced world being thrust into an isolated world where time slows and daily decisions become paramount to survival. Unfortunately, Cast Away manages to cheat the audience at every turn by focusing on the least interesting aspects of being forced into isolation and what how it will affect a person once they return. How would you react to the first person you saw in four years? How about your first hot shower? How about your first hot meal that wasn't fish or coconuts? You can keep asking yourself because, in a odd story-telling decision, the creators of Cast Away have chosen to skip over this entire portion of Tom Hank's story. What the audience is left with is a protagonist we learn little about, his initial life on a deserted island, and a return to civilisation that lacks any dramatic punch. A real disappointment considering the talent involved.
The St. Francisville Experiment (2000)
The only life lost is yours if you watch this movie.
I rented this one by accident. I lifted the video up and looked at the back and thought "shameless Blair Witch rip-off". Then, in a moment of carelessness, I grabbed 'The Francisville Experiment' thinking it was something else. My horror upon arriving home and realizing my mistake was far more terrifying than anything this film had to offer. Boring Characters, bad acting, and a feeling of 'we saw the Blair Witch Project and could do the same' permeate the action to the point where watching on fast forward will lead you straight to the credits. I'm not one to fault film makers for being lazy or desperate, but after this yawn-fest I felt the need to warn everyone: don't waste your time, you have a life.
12 Monkeys (1995)
Although it doesn't always add up, the story is at least different.
Not many movies get made about plagues wiping out mankind and this one throws in time-travel to boot. What makes this a stand-out is that it doesn't talk the sci-fi to death and focuses more on the characters. Sometimes the plot elements don't add up, but the all-around storytelling is high quality.