Change Your Image
ainaithilwen
Reviews
Sucker Punch (2011)
Well, it sucked all right...
I loved 300. I adored Watchmen. I really wanted to at least like Sucker Punch, but alas, that was not to be.
First, I'm a woman, so seeing chicks prance around in thigh-highs fishnet stockings and slutty schoolgirl uniform (which I find rather creepy) doesn't do anything for me. Sorry, but after a while, my main thought was 'less boobs, more scenario/dialogue/anything please' Second: the music was gorgeous, but with the admittedly impressive CGI fights and overly pretty images, well, it felt like an outrageously long MTV music video. Note that I wouldn't make that complaint about 300, because the fights there were not as repetitive as in Sucker Punch. Because let's face it, the fights here are boring. It's like playing Tomb Raider 1: there is a set number of moves, and that's it.
Also, the orcs at the medieval fortress... Ripping off Lord of the Rings make up style much? Don't get me wrong, Sucker Punch is bad-ass. Steam-powered zombie Nazis... life probably can't get much better.
But a scenario might have been nice. Better (less awful) dialogues, too.
Also, why on earth does the first level of the girl's fantasy world have to be a bordello? That's pretty gratuitous, at least in my opinion.
Moreover: I went to see this expecting a bad-ass girl-power ass-kicking fest. That is not what I got. If I want girl-power, I'll go back to watching the awesome Ripley in Alien and Aliens, because those pretty girls all dolled up (in the sluttiest get-ups)? That's not girl power, that's the chick fantasizing herself as she should be to attract the male gaze. Because we're supposedly in the girl's imagination, right? And she's that innocent, virginal 20-year old, so how come her dream self and her friends look like they stepped out of a dirty magazine? (and why the bordello, dammit??) And anyone else feeling a burning desire to slap that doe-eyed, 'why me?', uncomprehending look off the protagonist's face, raise your hands, please.
Anyway,I guess guys (at least some of them) might find that movie interesting as softcore porn/gaming footage. As far as I'm concerned, it was utter toss.
Valhalla Rising (2009)
Welcome to the fourth dimension
"Slow" doesn't really begin to describe that thing, because 'slow' implies that something is actually going somewhere, however slowly. Oh, I get the final sacrifice and all, and the fact that this is all very deep and teeming with symbols, but really, would you follow a movie that has : - almost no dialogue (I timed the beginning for the hell of it: the first line of dialogue occurs ten minutes into the film. Let me tell you it seemed like a very long time from where I was sitting... And it doesn't get much better during the other 80 minutes) -characters that are nearly impossible to tell apart (oh, wait! we have religious fanatic!mud-covered viking, crazy!mud-covered viking and ... nope. Mud-covered vikings all around.) Except the kid and OneEye, for obvious reasons. Otherwise, you get to see random Vikings popping out of the woodwork here and there every time you think that, maybe, they are finally all dead and the nightmare is going to end soon. On that subject, I wish to report an exchange with a fellow spectator who, when I ventured out loud that all the characters might perhaps die and be done with it, answered that it wouldn't be much more boring if they did. I feel that is a fair assessment of the movie.
- dismal photography. Did I tell you about the mud ? No ? because there is mud. Everywhere, all the time. and nearly greyish landscapes (yes, even the trees. You see them, you know they are green, but it still feels grey. That's how bad it is.) Bottom of the line: all of this is absolutely ugly without one redeeming feature.
- music that... well, it's a case of too much and not enough: most of the time, there are no sounds at all, which gets very old very fast since no one is talking either. And then there are moments when an ungodly pseudo-techno-whatever noise begins, and you taste the full bitterness of the well-known sentence: be careful what you wish for - vikings on crack. There is one scene in which viking whats-his-face number one murders Viking whats-his-face n°2 (in the mud, of course, because a muddy death is always more aesthetically pleasing, right?) - at least I think that's what's happening - This scene is cut with images of Oneeye building, for some obscure reason, a heap of rather large rocks. I don't know what that was. I don't know what it was supposed to be or to achieve, but what it did elicit in the audience was an explosion of bewildered, bordering on hysterical, laughter.
BUT: if you are looking for a flick to dissect and snark over with a few friends, this one is ideal. It leaves the so-bad-it's-good mark far behind, passes the 'say, WTF???' limit with flying colours and settles at a comfortable 'somewhere in the world, people intend to make money with this, and perhaps some have watched it and consider it good. Welcome to the fourth dimension.'
The Donner Party (2009)
mood piece
I have been looking around a bit to see what people generally thought about this movie, and I have noticed several complaints about its historical inaccuracy. I was however under the impression that, as the genres indicated on the IMDb page (drama and western) seem to suggest, this was never intended to be a documentary. That implies a certain freedom to depart for the actual facts, doesn't it ?
Other reviewers have already praised the bleak, low-saturation images, the extremely appropriate music (used with the greatest effect for the execution scene, which is absolutely gripping) and the beautiful and desolate locations (endless snow and ominous skeleton-like branches silhouetted against somber grey skies). I'll add to this the great job done by the make-up people on this film (truthfully, at one point, I thought it was starting to look a bit like a period Night of the Living Dead around the campfire. Dying characters that actually look the part... That doesn't happen as often as one would believe...).
About the plot and the complaint that not much happens... I am going to be grossly pragmatic here, but starving people don't really have the energy to do much, do they ? They 'plod' along the lines of a film that works as a mood piece (dreary. avoid if you're easily depressed) and psychological drama - yes. another one of those, complete with hints of reflection on what humanity is and how desperate times can strip it away from man. a bit heavy-handed at times, but thankfully not a stark manichean treatment of the theme. For instance, generally whiny and annoying Foster - Glover's character. watch for that scene where he makes his long, choked up speech when the party sets out. and the "I am a Christian" bit. makes you want to throttle him, doesn't it ? - has a couple of touching moments, as when he endeavours to cheer up his (personality-deprived) wife.
On the subject of acting: here is another impressive Glover performance. Without the ever-enjoyable hysterics to be found in his more eccentric roles (cf Willard or Simon Says), the more subtle nuances are given centre-stage, establishing an interesting character difficult to pigeonhole. In the party under Foster's command, the widow with the haunted eyes (Santopietro) is especially heart-wrenching while W. Eddy (Crawford) is also suitably ambiguous in his steely determination.
On a completely random tangent, if I may make a remark in rather poor taste, but which I can't resist: I don't know whether people do taste like chicken as it has been suggested in more humorous takes on the matter, but in this film, one has to admit that the cooked result does look a lot like it ...
and by the way, what did they mean by "adding into the pot" ? A FAQ on the subject would be appreciated if someone understands that part...
Simon Says (2006)
come over to the dark side... they have pick-axes and Crispin Glover
oh that was fun. Laughing-so-hard-I-fell-off-my-bed type of fun.
First, as one reviewer rather effectively put it: it's raining pick-axes. Well, when it rains it pours! Lovely machinery in this forest... Just a thought in passing: either Simon/Stanley spends a lot of his free time scouring the woods for his scattered pick-axes (in which case the murderous lifestyle becomes rather understandable) or he gets fined a lot for littering. Then again, he'd just pick-axe the cop's ass and be done with it, so...
Still, imagine Glover's character stalking his prey in the forest, his fiercest scowl in place .... and falling flat on his face after tripping over a forgotten pick-axe. Talk about an anticlimax...
Also: "if you gonna die, might as well die high." When the resident stoner bleats that scintillating piece of wisdom, one may want to murder him. Bless Simon/Stanley's little jealous heart that he does exactly that. With . A . Giant . Joint. Yep. 'Smoking will kill you' all right.
in the same vein, the dog scene was hilarious. Don't get me wrong, I love dogs. Usually, cruelty to animals in movies makes me queasy, but that stomp was just too over-the-top to be taken seriously. And afterwards, when Simon (in little-boy-lost mode) appears cradling the "sleeping" dog... awww, bless, that's almost cute. For a blood-covered psycho redneck carrying around a squashed dog-corpse. You get the idea...
and ... was that an eyeball stuck to the back of the newspaper ???
I can't resist adding a bit about Glover's southern (?) accent: that was awful, painful, terrible ... and very, very funny. That's the bit that clinches the deal for me: the friend I watched this with says it's a failed horror movie, but with that kind of performance in it, it just has to be a parody (especially since the rest of the characters includes Generic Jock, Generic Slut, Generic Stuck-up-kid-who-dies-first and Generic Stoner... you don't stick so closely to the rules of a genre unless you want to mess with them).
So, to sum it up, we have cheese, pick-axes, more cheese, a few paintball players passing through just long enough to be slaughtered gleefully (serves them right for the dog's name), a bit more cheese, and Crispin Glover who carries the show practically alone, and does a great job of it too.
The Wizard of Gore (2007)
not sure what happened exactly. or whether it happened.
while the gore is admittedly not all that impressive as far as realism goes (were those papier-mâché guts when Glover's character disembowelled the first girl ??? as for the burnt-alive blonde... no comment),the effect is however still cringe-worthy.
And I did cringe. a lot.
OK,at the beginning, the cringing had more to do with 'Montag the Magnificent's (sic)rather embarrassing insane laughter (nevertheless, I am happy to report that the rest of Glover's performance did not elicit any more what-the-hell-tell-me-he-did-not... *facepalm* reactions among the group of friends I was watching the film with. In fact, the manic cheerfulness of it contrasted rather nicely with the wanton slaughtering of strippers going on on stage.
back to the cringing: freaks chomping down on maggots and rats are always a crowd-pleaser (And for those who are hiding behind a pillow, too bad it won't keep the sound effects away. Well, more pizza for the other viewers I guess...) The cringe-worthiness of the slaughtering is more in the wanton aspect of it than in its actual visuals (the girl that gets bits chopped off with the bear traps does not even bleed. However, Glover's suavely unconcerned delivery of the accompanying monologue makes the scene chilling enough).
on a random tangent: could retro-boy (the "hero") have been played with an even more emo angle? and his girlfriend's nagging about his knowing the stripper's name, while ethically understandable, was just annoying. Not quite sorry to see that one die...
but on to my main point: I guess my friends and I are a particularly clueless bunch, but I would be grateful if someone could explain who did what to whom and when (I got the why, but that's about it). Because I'm still trying to figure it out since we saw the movie last week.
Still, the fact is that, despite the movie's numerous flaws, it manages (though, from what I've read, this does not apply to all viewers) to make you want to figure it out beyond the usual "what does it say in IMDb's FAQ ? nothing. oh, well." And that is why I give it a 7. Well, that and the fact that, while the plot line is terribly confusing - or maybe decided to leave on an extended vacation,I'm not sure - I was, for once, not bored into unconsciousness.) And the comedy value of the movie as a whole is not to be underestimated either...