Reviews

I always say that I am going to write a short review but I end up rambling on anyway. I really do not care if a horror movie is scary or not. I know that does not make a whole lot sense, since we know that horror movies main objective is to scare you. As long as it is entertaining and interesting, that is all that matters to me. With that being said, "The Conjuring 2" is one of the better mainstream horror sequels in recent years and it really did keep me engaged.

James Wan's direction is very good. He successfully makes this a supernatural moody horror flick. Even though there are cheap jump scares that you can see from a mile away, the malevolent forces were way more interesting and threatening, than in the first film.

The screenplay by Chad & Carey Hayes, James Wan and David Johnson wisely puts more focus on the family this time, instead of Patrick Wilson and Vera Farmiga's characters. They play more of a supporting role and it works, following a different path than most horror flicks these days.

The cast does an adequate job with what they are given. The supporting cast includes Madison Wolfe, Frances O'Connor, Lauren Esposito, Benjamin Haigh and Patrick McAuley.

I remember not being too impressed by the first "Conjuring" film. Matter of fact, it was my last date movie. As for this one, this makes a pretty good date flick.

The cinematography by Don Burgess is the best thing about this movie. It is probably the best cinematography that I have seen in mainstream horror film since 2014's "The Purge: Anarchy." This is a well shot film and he totally plays up the "boogeyman lurking around the corner" fear.

Go see "The Conjuring 2." It is probably going to be one of the best mainstream horror movies I will see this year. I kind of hate I liked this movie so much because that means I might not like part 3. Part 3 is coming. Box office receipts will prove that.

"Night of the Demons," the 1988 low-budget cult classic horror flick has everything you want in it: nudity, gore and funny dialogue. The plot is so basic that even a two year old could understand it. While a good movie, it still has it's flaws that cannot be easily overlooked. The problem does not lie within the story because if you actually look at it, the story was simple yet creative and effective but it lies with the performances of the actors.

First off, lets talk about the plot. The plot is basic, as I have already stated. It centers on a group of teens, that throw a party at an abandoned funeral parlor on Halloween(go figure) which is hosted by their freakishly weird classmate Angela. During a séance, weird things began to happen which opens the portal to, you guessed it, demons being unleashed. It is not long until the demons take possession of the teenagers, causing havoc for the rest of the movie.

Don't get me wrong. "Night of the Demons" isn't a bad flick, for it's heart is in the right place. However it sorely lacked in the acting department. The performances were so terrible that it wasn't even good for horror movie standards. The lead actress' performance was so bad, that it just seemed the casting director just randomly picked her off the street and said "you're going to be in horror movie, we need as many people as we can get." The film's strength however lies within it's wild frenetic cinematography(Evil Dead anyone) and gory F/X. If this film's cinematography had not of been that great and the effects would've been less than stellar, this film would've got a less than stellar review from me.

"Night of the Demons" is a good image of reminding us of the good old fashioned days of horror, back when everything was so simple and directors actually still had a lot of creativity, but is sorely brought down because of it's bad acting. Still it's a good film but the acting is what keeps it from being raised from "barely" average 80's horror flick.

"Cyber Seduction: His Secret Life" is the type of Lifetime picture that premieres every once or two weeks dealing with the same matter about kids getting involved in adult activities and or partaking in adult materials. Obviously, given the title, the film is no different. This movie tells the tale of a successful high school sophomore that develops a deep, unhealthy obsession to internet porn. While this film has it's heart in the right place it is, at times, unintentionally laughable, so laughable that you would think it would have made for a good Saturday Night Live parody.

As stated, this is not a bad film it's just that it feels uneven in some scenes. For example, when Justin Petersen's(played by Jeremy "Peter Pan" Sumpter)mother is talking to his father asking him if he fantasizes about other women, he replies back "Honey you fulfill all my fantasies and not just the sexual ones." Now when the writers wrote that line did they think that people would actually take that line of dialogue seriously? It is as if they couldn't think of nothing else to write so they decided to add that line in the script to further enhance the boy's growing problem with porn addiction.

Another major flaw in this movie is that, the characters often did stupid things where you just wanted to yell at the TV, "Are you really that stupid?" Tell me how all of a sudden the school slut/popular girl, who happens to be a senior, would take interest in a shy, quiet goody goody sophomore. Also, would a person be that obsessed with porn that they would watch it, on their palm pilot while at a swim meet around hundreds of people? It just doesn't make any sense. I know in movies, you suppose to suspend disbelief but are they expecting us to buy this stuff?? Above all "Cyber Seduction" message is intended to be strong but it falls by on the wayside. Though not a bad film, whenever you need a good laugh be sure to check this one out.

What do you get when you mix stolen drugs, too wise-cracking savvy cops and high octane action together? You get "Bad Boys," the 1995 sleeper hit directed by a then unknown commercial director Michael Bay and staring two television stars named Will Smith and Martin Lawrence. "Bad Boys" is perhaps the epitome of the 90's with all it's stylishness and flashy colors that is guaranteed a rare treat for action fans.

In every scene, it is evident that Martin Lawrence and Will Smith has chemistry and it is not hard to believe that some of their lines were improvised through the filming of this production.

However most praises definitely go to the then, unknown Michael Bay who got his start in directing commercials and music videos. Every explosion and camera angle was a grave representation of what would become Michael Bay's trademark in his later films: directing visually stunning movies that make even the little guys look heroic and intimidating figures of royalty.

If you haven't seen "Bad Boys" by now, you'll be doing a grave injustice to the world by not seeing it. If it hasn't already become a cult classic it will surely be one in the near future.

"Collateral Damage" is the type of film that bears so many similarities to a particular world event that you would have to wonder where the line of realism and unrealism begins. Planned to be released after the unknowingly September 11th attacks, this movie does a good job of displaying one person's struggle for justice and revenge over a lost loved one.

In this film, Arnold Schwarzenegger shows great character development. He is not the Terminator, predator hunter, nor Conan the Barbarian. He's just a regular guy with regular problems and this what makes his role truly authentic. For a while I shyed away from this movie because I thought it would be another Arnold post "Batman and Robin" movie but it was more than that. Here was a story about a man who wanted revenge for his dead wife and child that he would travel as far as to Columbia to make sure somebody pay severely for this act of terrorism.

In a way, it is not surprising that this movie flopped at the box-office. Maybe the world wasn't ready for this movie even though this film was pushed back a couple of months after 9/11. So much stuff was going on at that time including the recent death of famed R&B singer Aaliyah and the world's bout with anthrax. In my opinion, "Collateral Damage" is probably the quintessential movie to show the rage and anger people felt during the dark gloomy day known as September 11, 2001.

Pictured this. Camp Crystal Lake. Towards the end of a bloody battle the infamous killer Jason Voorhies he is suddenly pulled down to hell by a bunch of demons. It is sunrise. Only thing that is left is his mask. The camera slowly pans down as we see....

BAM!! Freddy Krueger's hand pops up and takes Jason masks down to Hell with him.

Now, that's some scary stuff. Maybe some of you understood what I just said and some of you didn't. If you didn't understand what I just said, you will see what I'm talking about when you watch a one of the Friday the 13th films "with a final Friday" Anyway, due to this surprise and clever ending to what was suppose to be the "final, final Friday" it was obvious that New Line Cinema was going to pair these two titans of horror(Freddy and Jason) in their own epic film. After years of speculation and many different drafts of the script, I must say that it was worth the wait..."Freddy vs. Jason" was a rock 'em, sock 'em good time.

For one, the writers stayed true to the Freddy and Jason mythology. I liked how they didn't just make up some mumbo jumbo bullsh*t just to try to fit it into the story. They tied the Freddy and Jason mythology together so well, that the team up was brought together in the most respectable manner, thus doing justice to both of the franchises.

When I heard that Ronny Yu was directing this, I thought that he would not do a good job(since he directed the awful "Bride of Chucky") but he did a great job directing this long awaited team up. It is obvious that he wanted to make a larger than life movie and it came out well since Freddy and Jason was larger than life stars.

As usual, Robert Englund gives a fantastic performance as Freddy and he still shows that while Freddy is an evil, sadistic child killer he is still charismatic in every way.

One thing that I didn't like about this movie, is that the director tried to make Jason out to be the good guy when in all entirety, Freddy and Jason are evil to the fullest. This is a medium to major flaw on their part. It's no biggie but I felt that it wasn't the best direction to go.

In conclusion, Freddy vs. Jason was worth the wait. I know a lot of people bash this movie but it's a very solid horror film and I would go as far as to say that it's one of the better horror films of the 2000's.

"No Escape," the 1994 action film that is directed by Martin Campbell is an achievement in film-making. With "No Escape," Campbell takes us to a prison of the future that no one would want to go: a deadly island prison where the only way out is through death.

The reason why I think "No Escape" works is not because of it's brilliant acting nor because of it's chemistry between it's actors, it's in fact because of the film's great concept which allows the viewer to envision in their mind a place so grimy that anyone would try their best to not get sent to that prison.

Before I watched "No Escape" or even thought about watching this film, I had bought the video game but use to have difficulty playing the game, so this is what enhanced my interest in watching the movie. This movie is a marvel of a gem; it's a shame that most people haven't heard about it.

Back in 1995, I was told about a little movie that featured horror tales from an African-American perspective. People told me that "Tales from the Hood" was a funny, laugh-out-loud film. I believed them. It wasn't until the end of this eerie movie that my decision had changed, along with my life.

"Tales from the Hood," the 1995 gangsta horror flick moved quietly into theaters without anyone noticing. It had made it's way on home video in December 1995(yay, in time for Christmas) and little did I know what I was getting myself into. Yes the film did start off funny, cuz it was rather amusing to see three bumbling gangsters go and collect drugs from a funeral home(how odd) but little did I know that this movie would forever change my life after that brief introduction to the movie.

As with any horror anthology or anthology in general, this film had a series of stories that had an impact on me. The first story was the scariest of all which featured a black politician that is killed by three white racist cops, which he ultimately comes back from the dead and gets his "revenge." The second story is a new twist on the "my stepfather is a monster" type stories and it features a young boy that is abused by his stepfather and through a change of events, he gets even with him in his own, quirky little way.

The third tale features a white racist politician that receives warnings to move out of his house(because his house was built over an old slave plantation).

The fourth and final tale is probably the most important one. It speaks on "black on black violence" in the African American community and while studying other people's comments about this film, I heard that it draws similarities from "A Clockwork Orange." Even though I said "Tales from the Hood" is the scariest movie I've seen it was still rather quite boring. It is as if the film slows down in between the middle and doesn't know whether it's trying to take itself seriously or play the audience up for a few laughs.

I think the main reason why I thought this film was scary was not because of the whole film, in general, but for the first tale, that about police brutality against blacks. I didn't really fully notice the underlying themes, but that was some scary stuff when Martin Morehouse came back from his grave.

"Tales from the Hood" has forever changed my life. Even though people will disagree with me and say that this film is not scary, this is the only true film that ever actually scared me and I seen this when I was eleven. Next week will be the 10 year anniversary(Dec. 26, 1995) since I seen this film and sometimes, and I have never watched the film all the way through since.

"Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring" the December 2001 blockbuster directed by now famed Peter Jackson may have been a hit critically and commercially but this film is very very very far from what I call a good film.

For three years, I ad voided seeing this movie. Mostly everybody I knew or encountered had nothing but positive things to say about this film. So in January 2005, I finally decided to give this movie a chance. My assumptions were right; I ended up not liking the movie.

There are many problems with this movie. For one, the acting. The acting was pretty terrible in this film. Most of the actors and actresses in this film looked like they just rehearsed their lines one time in the mirror before they began shooting this monster(and I don't mean in a good way) of a film. Lord of the Rings did not really have any characters I felt sorry for nor cared about. Can somebody please explain to me why the heck Sir Ian McKellan got an Oscar nomination for this schlok of a film? How he got nominated still puzzles me to this day.

Now I know I will be crucified for saying this but I don't care. The plot, when I think about it, wasn't all that great. Basically from what I gather about this plot is that it is about a young hobbit that embarks on an epic quest to destroy a ring. Wow, how interesting is that(sarcastic)! I think another reason why I didn't like this movie is because it's a fantasy film and I hate fantasy movies. So it was quite obvious that I wasn't going to like "LOTR" Now, I haven't seen the last two films but I still want to see them, so I can complete the trilogy. Who knows, I might actually like them. All in all, "LOTR:TFOTR" gets two thumbs down, way down.

Man, oh man, oh man. "Wild Things," the 1998 film that turned Neve Campbell and Denise Richards into sex symbols was a very influential film that inspired a generation in the late 90's. 6 years later, we received the very late and unnecessary sequel "Wild Things 2." Now, in 2005 we get the third entry in the Wild Things film series called "Wild Things: Diamonds in the Rough." One question came to mind after I finished watching this crap-fest: "what were they thinking?" This movie is the same as the second one. Basically all they just did was recycle the plot from "Wild Things 2(which was recycled from "Wild Things")" and had cast different people in the same roles. The two lead female vixens were not convincing at all. From the moment the movie started you knew what was going to happen: spoiled little rich girl hates "trailer trash girl," trailer trash girl actually is friends with spoiled little rich girl and they both come up with a way to get millions of dollars. We saw this with the last two "Wild Things" movies except the first, original movie was done with more style.

A word to the producers: please stop making these straight to home video sequels. You're f*cking up the rotation.