Change Your Image
RN-1
Reviews
The Roller Blade Seven (1991)
Watch this film! the awfulness must be seen to be believed!
okay, let's cut to the chase - there's no way i can give this anything other then 1 out of 10; and yet you have to see it! The acting is bad, but is nothing like as bad as the script, which itself pales before the production values. Cardboard axes? yup, we've got then. Car floor mats painted silver and used as armour? here it is!
The film itself pretends to be artistic, but is just cheap; the same shots are used repeatedly - especially in the drawn out fight scenes; there is (thankfully!) very little dialogue, and there is much 'artistic' music to ram home the horror!
And yet all this awfulness is compelling - you have to watch it through just so that you can say you've seen it. I've not even got onto the barren sets, the 'plot', or the risible special effects; this really is the 'how not to do it' school of filmmaking. This must be viewed - spread the word, and let the world all join together in puzzling over what on earth is happening at the end
The best thing, though, is that they made a sequel.
Star Wars: Episode II - Attack of the Clones (2002)
very pretty, very empty
It wasn't as boring as the last. It was very beautiful, lots of pretty pictures and cgi that didn't actually ruin the film (shock!). But amongst all these good things were a weak (and obvious) plot, terrible direction, and possible the most implausible love story this side of Spaceballs.
More good things? Well, I suppose it does help build the mythos of the Star Wars universe, and the action certainly picks up when we're with Obi-Wan. But over all, this is a film you forget about as soon as you leave the cinema. George Lucas forgot to include a soul to go with his pretty pictures.
Shadow of the Vampire (2000)
Almost, almost, almost...
I just don't know what to say about this. A deeply strange film that is almost a comedy, almost a horror, almost nothing. Very funny in places - although not so as you would laugh out loud - this film is really made by some top-notch acting. William Dafoe and especially Eddie Izzard - in a role made for him - are superb, and all the performances and characterisations are pitched just right. The idea is also wonderful, full of in-jokes and period charm.
So why aren't I raving about this, then? I guess because the film is, fundamentally, very slight, short, and just missing a little depth that would make it one of the best films of the year. We could do with a little more time to spend on the characters, and just a little more tension. As it is it's over almost before we've begun - but what's happened to all the people - like Gustav - that we met before? Are they dead, or just not on the set?
This is certainly worth seeing, and very good fun, but ends just a little short of the masterpiece they were shooting on the set.