Change Your Image
SrCAPnCDLvl99
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
Försvunnen (2011)
30 promising minutes followed by 67 predictable ones.
I have to admit that the the makers of this film had me hooked during the first 30 minutes or so of it. It's a shame the rest of it is so predictable and full of improbabilities that it ends up being quite a disappointment of a film.
It has a lot going for it. Two somewhat talented directors (though one could question if there's a need for two in this case), a brilliant cast and a beautiful setting. What it lacks is a decent and not so derivative script.
Some of the things that bugged me:
Sofia Ledarp's character hides in a hunter's tower in one scene. This makes for poor choice of location as there's not a single person in the (Swedish) audience that doesn't immediately think of Kjell Sundvall's Jägarna.
There's a German hunter character that turns up halfway through the film. I don't speak German, but I'm relatively sure that he says he's hunting moose. What else is there to hunt in Sweden for a German hunter? Stereotypes anyone?
Björn Kejllman's character is shot in his side, possibly through his stomach and still manages to survive one night and half a day out in the woods though it is quite likely that he has sustained internal bleeding.
In one scene, Sofia Ledarp's character manages to sneak into the back-seat of the car driven by the man hunting her, where she gets hold of a phone. She uses it to call the Swedish equivalent of 911 and she has to whisper quite high for the operator to hear her. Why is it that Kjell Bergqvist's character (the man hunting her) can't hear her? He has to be deaf not to hear her, and he's obviously not deaf as he manages to find her wherever she hides for the entirety of the film.
It's highly improbable that Björn Kejllman's character would be found at all at the end of the film.
Regarding the ending, there's not much to say. This is the kind of film that ends in one of two ways:
1) The main character manages to escape and runs out into an open field where he/she gets rescued by a police/military helicopter.
2) The main character manages to escape and finds his/her way to a road, where he/she gets help from the passengers of a conveniently approaching car. The driver of the car is either a savior or, in some cases, the man hunting him/her.
Guess which one they went with...
The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe (2005)
If you're a fan of the books, go see the film while it's in theaters!!!
Acting: Knowing that they spent several years looking for the right children for the main characters, it doesn't really come as a surprise that they're all amazing actors although in most of the cases if not all, this is the first thing they've ever done. Wonderful performances from all of them. As Lucy is the character that first leads us into Narnia though, it is the part they just had to get right for the movie to work. Georgie Henley does a great job of portraying the sense of magic this story is all about and you really see it in her eyes as she stumbles into the land of a 100 years of winter. All the voice actors also do truly remarkable things with their roles and Liam Neason did a surprisingly effective job with Aslan. It's a sad thing we never get to hear Brian Cox do the voice, but Neason is such a professional and as it turns out he is perfect for the role. I have to mention James Mcavoy as Tumnus also as he gives life to some of the most memorable scenes in the film. Tilda Swinton, doing the white witch Jadis as only she could have done, is now rightfully circling around in "for your consideration" ads. Give her an Oscar will you!?
Directing: SomehowAndrew Adamson was always the right way to go with this one as he's just as big a fan of the books as everyone reading this review. He really pulled it off, and made this into one of the best films of all time, one that will be remembered for years to come.
Digital Effects: I'm running out of superlatives here. This is some of the best, if not THE best work in visual effects history to this date. You just can't get a higher grade when you're making the audience watching the animals talk, not only believe that they're real, but also not thinking about that they're computer generated characters. This way, instead of concentrating on how lifelike the characters look, you can concentrate on what the character says and thus experience the full performance of the actor doing the voice. The voices, combined with the state of the art VFX makes these creatures, through the books already loved by hundreds of millions of people around the world, REALLY come to life. Watching Aslan walk among his people is like going to the Zoo looking at a real life animal. It looks that realistic. This is the movie upon people will be judging all future work done in visual effects.
Music: Being a fan of the 80's BBC TV series it made me a bit nervous the first time i was about to hear Harry Gregson Williams score. I mean, Geoffry Burgon's main theme for the TV series had since my childhood always been close to my heart. I was not to be disappointed though as the score for this film is so much more epic in scale than even Howard Shore's Lord of The Rings outings. It is every bit as magical as Narnia itself. This score shines in it's full glory in the most important of scenes. From entering the Wardrobe, meeting Tumnus and playing the Narnian lullaby to going into full battle with the white witch this is an epic score to be remembered. It is also already nominated for a golden globe together with one for best song.
Adaptation: The changes made for adapting the book into a film all come off natural and nothing ever seem out of place or order, they enhance the value of the film. The most notable scenes added being the conversation between Edmund and Tumnus in the dungeon and being attacked by Maugrim and friends on the frozen river. These are both so great and so well directed that they seem like they were written by the hand of C.S. Lewis himself. As for adding a touching opening of war-struck London and making the end battle longer and more exciting than in the book (and in your imagination) well that's something i think no one would argue with. Of course it had to be done. It is as natural as making the girls more active in the battle scenes. Some of the dialog in the scenes with Tumnus seemed a bit too modern the first time i saw it though, but i kind of liked it the second and third time i saw it.
Costumes: From the 40'ish clothes worn by the kids to all the armor worn i battle this film has it all. It really shows that they spent just as much time and effort on detail for this to come alive as they did in the lord of the rings productions. But it's done by the same people at Weta, so that is a given.
Makeup/Prosthetics: KNB FX? Ever ever heard of these guys? Of course you have, these guys are legends. The makeup and prosthetics for this film is every bit as groundbreaking as the visual effects. Howard and co. i know you wanted the centaurs in this film to be the centaurs upon all centaurs will be judged. Well you've done it! The same goes with all the other creatures.
End grade for this film is 10 out of 10 as it is the best film i have ever seen, and i would like to say that i hope the academy recognizes this as such, but as they generally go for drama in the best picture category it feels like kind of a stretch. However Return of the king got nominated and i think it's only true to say that The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, The Witch And The Wardrobe has every bit as much drama as that film.
Phantasmagorical Mystery Tour (2005)
A short and light-hearted, but ultimately very satisfying tour
I have been a Phantasm fan for many years now and as such i've always wanted to make a visit to the house used for the mausoleum in the film. Being that i'm a citizen of another country that's pretty difficult to arrange. The Reggie Bannister led phantasmagorical tour takes you to all kinds of locations from the first film and it's one hell of a fun ride, but they somehow miss out on that very house i so desperately wanted to see up close. Soo close, but clearly no cigar awarded. I am sure there are some damn good reasons for this but if by chance it would be due to someone having completely forgotten about that house they were going to shoot, then, well, i'd kill myself. Cause' it's not gonna get much better than the box set they've just released so there's probably no chance of ever seeing this as yet another Phantasm box set, even if released in HD is years away.
Phantasmagoria (2005)
Professionally Phantastic!
This is without hesitation one of the best documentaries made about a film, a series of films or in this case; a cult phenomenon. It has been a long journey from the conception of an idea for a Phantasm box set to the finished product conceived October 31st 2005, but never have us phans had any doubts in our gods at Anchor Bay UK. Thread after thread have been started, read and closed the last couple of years at Phantasmfilms.com, and endless discussions have in some cases ended with the same kind of mysterious questions the films themselves pose.
At the time when the specs for the box set were finally released, it came as no surprise that an feature-length documentary was part of the deal. Phantasmagoria as it was named is the ultimate of dreams for fans of the series as it literally contains everything you ever wanted to know about the Phantasm saga. From the use of Lego parts in killer spheres to how to make your own dwarf sounds, everyone is interviewed in detail with the exception of LeGros. Phantastic stuff not to be missed by anyone with the slightest bit of interest in the films, or in the horror genre in general.
War of the Worlds (2005)
could have been better?
Felt like the last third of the film had deep holes in it and that lots of stuff was missing. Like they had taken out the end battle and instead cut to the family reunion scene right away. The first two thirds though; are the best work Spielberg's done since The Terminal. (Yeah, i'm a big fan, so what?) In other words: not much to complain about! This is after all a great film, and this is without a doubt the coolest film you'll be seeing this year. The Tripods are truly frightening and the aliens are presented in a fresh and unique manner. Funny how ILM always seem to get their stuff together when Spielberg's at the helm when their results otherwise often vary. Here; all is good. But i guess Spielberg deserves all the respect he can get.
A warning is in place for parents who are thinking about taking their kids to go see this as it is quite frightening. People die left to right here and blood is splattered across the screen. Most of it is off screen and discrete, but some images are haunting and the scenes in the beginning and towards the middle of it are intense.
Highwaymen (2004)
A little-seen masterpiece that deserves your attention!
Living in a country where this film sadly wasn't shown in theatres, my options were either to download it from the Internet (something I am proud to say I don't do) or to wait for the eventual DVD. I got the DVD yesterday.
I'd been dying to see this film ever since I first saw the trailer for it on a New Line DVD (I love the words "Also from New Line"), I think it might have been "Blade II", not sure. The whole premise of the movie seemed so cool; A madman that has integrated himself into his own car, drives down highways all over America hitting (and thus killing) people with his car. He is followed by a man whose wife he killed, a man that will do everything for revenge he has already been given once, as he demolished the madman's car putting him into a wheelchair. I love films like this; that are different.
As I watched the film last night, I found myself looking at the DVD-player every 10 minutes or so just to know how much of it was left, thinking it couldn't last, but it did! It's that great!! The film opens with these extremely gorgeous wide shots orchestrated by the films DP Rene Ohashi, who also worked with Harmon on "They". A lot of it is shot using a helicopter, and it's among the best I've seen using one, but even the more static shots are truly unique, almost evoking a sense of poetry. As the film tightens and get into high gear with it's amazing action-sequences, including a massive crash-scene in a tunnel, the quality of the photography does not once deteriorate. The beautiful visuals of "Highwaymen" are accompanied by an equally as poetic score crafted by the always as talented Mark Isham, almost a veteran by now, having scored more than 93 films including "Kiss The Girls", "Blade", "Spartan" and "Miracle". There is elements of originality here, and it's certainly a one of a kind score even though you might not remember it the following day, in part due to the relatively short running time of the film itself.
"Highwaymen" is also a very professionally edited film. The way in which flashbacks are shown here is genius, truly unique. Sure, I've seen it done in a similar matter before, but not nearly as cleverly executed. Of course, there's no problem with the editing of the rest of the movie, as it is just as finely tuned. The car-chases and crash-scenes are also edited in a way that the most experienced editor would have a hard time complaining about.
As for the actors, well, what can I tell you? With a cast like this you can't really go wrong, can you? In one corner, we have Jesus Christ himself; James Caviezel, a man who, without a doubt, will grab the best actor of the year Oscar come next March. In the other? The very beautiful up-and-coming star Rhona Mitra. Both are talented actors carrying their roles without a flaw in sight. The chemistry between these two is hot. Colm Feore, whom some of you might recognize from his menacing role of André Linoge in the Stephen King miniseries adaptation "Storm of The Century", does not deliver a quite as energetic performance here. The character he plays here is better off, left in the shadows though. You've heard this before: "The more you show, the less scary it gets". He does a great job establishing a threat, and that's enough to garner a build-up of tension. Frankie Faison's Macklin character is a paper-thin one we don't really get to know much about other than the fact that he seem to think that his job is boring and that he spends most of his time filling out forms.
If I have to (was forced to) come up with something to complain about here, it would be A) that the film regrettably is way too short and B) the last ten seconds of the film. Let me explain why:
A)I would love to get my hand on whatever scenes they edited or deleted away, cause there's bound to be some usable material that could have boosted the length of the film. There would have been nice to see some scenes shot as flashbacks from the two years Rennie spent tracking down this maniac. There has to have been a lot of "So close" moments and exciting car chases across the country during that period. Some of this is explained in the scenes used for the V.O. in the theatrical trailer though.
B) Why these add-on endings consisting of 10 extra seconds of silly conclusiveness still exists is beyond me. Who wants this?? SPOILER!!! It really surprise me that a character such as Macklin (am not sure if this was his name), who has been portrayed as a slow-moving traffic investigator not entirely aware of the full story, would shoot a man in the head at close range. Especially since it has clearly been established that he does not carry a gun, or as in this case; a shotgun, in his service, only a block of forms and a simple pen. Where'd he get that shotgun!???? And was is not him that told Rennie they were there to "help, not to commit homicide", just minutes before? Where did all the logic go?
As you might have noticed reading this review, I quite liked this film. I can not tell you how much I enjoyed it. It have to be one of my favorite films that I've seen, this year at least, and I highly recommend it to anyone with an open mind and a love for movies that are a bit odd and stray from mass-produced mainstream-trash. This film has enough atmosphere and style to more than fill your needs for something special. Oh, and NO, I am not employed at or in any means associated with New Line Cinema, I just love this film!
Godsend (2004)
Great film, not so great script.
I had great hopes for this film, I really had. It starts off great, and you have to admit that the script for this film is quite original. At least the first half of it. Warning people that are offended by SPOILERS in advance, I will discuss plot-points that may not be fun to know of before viewing the film.
Zachary, spelled correctly, is where the film starts to fall. As soon as the cliché ghost story elements of it takes off, you're in for something you've seen many times before. Come on! This is so lame you're asking yourself if the original writer was fired because of "creative differences" and then replaced by Ehren Kruger to finish the job. The film now changes from cloning-thriller to split-personality horror without the horror. Everything goes wrong here, trust me. The DVD has four alternate endings to prove it.
Should I have had the power to influence the director's choices before final cut, had I been given the chance, I would have preferred a variation of ending number three here! Why not just have the father strangle the damn kid? Can I say that? Nothing against Cameron Bright, he was great, so was the rest of the cast, but did they read the whole thing before they signed on? I don't know. Having father strangle son and then go directly to end credits would be a totally satisfying way to end it. Think about it! They go through all the trouble of cloning their dead son and then watches him grow up to be a freak, sneaking up behind his parents scaring them and killing classmates left to right. I'm telling you, this should never had been done and the only way to make it right would be to slip that rope around his neck. The funny thing is that even this feels like a bad cliché.
Having said that, what did I like about it part from the first 40 minutes or so of the film and the terrific cast? How about the music! This score is sooo great! I love this!! Brian Tyler is the most competent guy on the crew here. Fantastic! Brians music set to the opening credits by the VFX crew really got me!
In short: Great film, great cast, great music, great VFX opening credits but not so great script. Did they do test screenings at all?
Les rivières pourpres (2000)
Barely rises above the average thriller...
I remember seeing this one on video at the time of it's video release. Some of the images actually managed to stick with me, like the menacing school, the corpse in the ice-cave and the avalanche at the end. However, as I saw it yesterday I realized that this film doesn't really rise above the average American thriller when you think about it. It's always refreshing to see a film in a different locale acted out in a different language,(as I, as a European does not have a problem with subtitles) but the plot basically stays the same, and the ending feels like a big cliché.
Mathieu Kassovitz, who directed this film pulls off some amazing shots at the beginning of the film that are just beautiful to look at and Crimson Rivers will forever be remembered as a film containing some of the most beautifully shot footage, using a helicopter. The rest of the movie stays more or less true to the opening impression but never surprises beyond that. Credit has to be given for the avalanche scenes toward the end though, where you really feel as though you're in there with the actors as they're covered with snow and then dug up by the rescue team. Thierry Arbogast, the films cinematographer did a great job collaborating with Kassovitz and it's probably him that should be thanked for the look of the film. However Kassovitz later did the highly atmospheric Gothika without Arbogast so maybe he didn't have so much to do with it after all?
The film would have have benefited from a more powerful soundtrack. The music composed by Bruno Coulais is a bit lame and could've been spiced up a bit to elevate the atmosphere to a higher level of fear than is represented in the film. The music can sometimes be the most important ingredient in a film and here it's just not good enough.
The actors do a great job and Jean Reno as a cop is something I haven't seen in any other film. But then again, I haven't seen everyone of his films.
As for the movie as a whole I'm not sure what they aimed at with this film. It's never the least scary and the cops scattered throughout the film are intended to be funny (and they are, for the most). Films that don't know where they want to be placed and mixes equal doses of action and humor are generally considered mainstream. It feels sad to say it, but Crimson Rivers does not rise above it. If you want to see a film that is A) European with subtitles, B)have a clear view of what it want to achieve in terms of fear and C)has a similar but better plot, go rent the German Horror/Thriller Anatomie! Or it's sequel for that matter, as even that is better than this film.
Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban (2004)
Could this be the worst book-to-film translation ever?
Could it be?
This is so far from the source material that you must ask yourself what happened. Someone in the long order of crewpeople involved with this film must've gotten something terribly wrong for it to turn into this. Sure the main plot and all the most important scenes are there, but the end product here feels like a film where they've taken parts from one half of the book, placed it in the wrong order and then thrown in a little action from the other half of the book. I'm sure most of you agree with this? At least those of you that read the book. Some short 20 minutes or so into the film we're already more than halfway through the book and many key scenes have been dropped. And what's with the ending? Are they serious? This is from the middle of the book if I don't remember something completely wrong here, and the fact that they actually skipped almost everything quidditch, which is one of the most beloved ingredients of the Harry Potter books puzzles me. This is something that will disappoint a lot of children during the week.
Don't get me wrong. I DO understand that sometimes drastic measures has to be taken in order for the film version of a book to not be overly long. I also understand that some scenes that are less important has to be thrown out and other scenes altered or sized up. However, it has been done far better before, and I just can't help that the disappointment feels more bitter that ever before. I sure hope Columbus is back for the next one. I want the MAGIC!
The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (2003)
More blood and gore, less psychological terror and atmosphere!
The Texas Chainsaw Massacre.... Not that many other films have scared me as much through the years as this film has. I am talking, of course, about the original film on which this remake is based. That film has a an intensely claustrophobic and highly unpleasant feel to it that Marcus Nispel just can't recreate here. He tries, and at times he's close, but he's got no cigar. Cinematographer Daniel Pearl, on the other hand, does have one and he's smoking it quite heavily throughout the picture as it is absolutely gorgeous to look at. (in it's own way of course)Pearl reprises his crew-position from the original film without heavily overlapping what he's already done before. A lot have changed in terms of the plot of the film for this remake. So much so that it feels more like a sequel (Texas Chainsaw Massacre 5) than a straight forward remake. (Texas Chainsaw Massacre (2003)) We have a complete set of new characters that for the most part feels out of place and era,(the fact that they've tossed Franklin is very noticeable) a bunch of scenes featuring predictable hide and seek action and a Leatherface now suffering from the same facial problems as Friday The 13th's Jason Voorhees. What's that about? I thought everybody knew by now that the more you explain, the less frightening it gets? We don't actually have to know why he's wearing other peoples´faces, do we? There is such a thing as imagination.
The new family is more creepier than the one in the original and as with the blood and the gore; we now get more family for the same price. Additional and alternate members has been added, and at least one, or two of these feel as extras; as if they have no real purpose.
It is evident from the very beginning of the film to the end that New Line went for the "more the merrier" concept with the 2003 version of The Texas Chainsaw Massacre. As a result: More blood and gore, more screen-time for Leatherface, but less psychological terror and atmosphere.
Elephant (2003)
Title set aside, a truly unique experience!
Gus Van Sant sure has guts! Not many directors would follow up a (by media) disastrous remake of Hitchcocks beloved Psycho (by many strangely considered a masterpiece)with a film that deals with the horrible events that occurred in Columbine. That's bravery!
Elephant is a film that is filmed in the same fashion as the films of Larry Clark. Kids, Bully and Ken Park fly through my head as I'm watching this film. The style is one that is meant to be free and to strengthen the sense of realism that is needed to accurately portray the tragic event that was Columbine. Some people may argue that the pace of the film is somewhat slow, and I'd have to agree, but that's life. I mean, this is a film that appears to be shot in something that at least resembles Real Time. The film is, oddly enough, structured the same way as Takashi Shimizu's Ju-On: The Grudge, a film that's in an entirely different genre. It centers on one character at a time and then switch to the next when the following character has made contact. It's simple yet brilliant. In this film though, they've taken it one step further by letting you see certain events from the perspectives of several of the characters. You follow one guy, and he ends up posing for a photograph. You then see the photographer walking up and meeting the guy that posed for his picture from the complete opposite direction without any sign of the camera that followed the other character, and it seems to be the same take, but shot from different directions. We then follow a third character as she runs through the corridor and passes both of them as the photographer is taking the picture. (We see her pass by in their versions). Incredibly cool, still: not groundbreaking.
There's not much of a story as this is yet another day in school for these kids and nothing really surprising happens. The girl mob that in one scene is bullying one of the characters that is followed by camera, talk for a while in the lunch hall, eats some salad and then enter the bathroom to simultaneously throw up. One of the two guys responsible for the massacre that cost the lives of 16 people plays the piano while the other orders some high-caliber and ultimately deadly weapons through the Internet. The package arrives the next day without any questions asked. "Just sign here please." The fact that these two enter the shower together and kiss (and who knows what) doesn't really surprise me as they don't have anything to loose, but it feels out of place and therefor makes the whole thing even scarier.
As the weapons are fired towards the end of the film, and the characters followed with their own camera earlier are gunned down among their classmates, there's no panic, no screaming. All we see are these boys shooting people in their heads, in their stomachs, in their chests. It's so quiet and almost without a single drop of blood spilled on screen that it makes everything so much more powerful.
Given that there are no real actors in this film and that most of it was improvised, there are some scenes where they could have ended up with better shots than they did, but as a whole; the film really holds up. The title of the film is one that should have been discussed though. I gather as much as this: It must have something to do with the fact that elephants have some skill or quality that is similar to that of the killers, I might be wrong. Whether or not this is the case, the title sucks, as nobody will ever see a film called Elephant if they don't know what it is. Some will, on the account of the director attached, or because of reputation, of course, but Elephant? There's no Elephant in the film to begin with!?? What a bad call!
In short: Elephant is a one of a kind film that shouldn't be missed! If you come across the opportunity to see this film, do so! You will not regret it, as it is a truly unique experience that you won't easily forget.
Tremors 4: The Legend Begins (2004)
Fresh meat and lots of fun for graboidsfans!
At first, the idea of a Tremors film set in the old west might sound like a bad one. But hey, every movie has to have a prequel these days, right? Tremors 4 is definitely one of the better of these prequels made recently. It actually manages to bring something new to the franchise, something that feels somewhat fresh and that doesn't necessarily build on clichés, although it does have it's share.
Michael Gross is back as usual, which is a great thing, cause it just wouldn't feel like a Tremors film without him. Gross plays Hiram Gummer, the great grandfather of Burt Gummer of the previous films. What's interesting about this is the fact that Hiram is quite the opposite of Burt. Hiram doesn't know how to handle a gun, which is why he has to hire a gunman to do the job. This is one of the most refreshing parts of the film: The arrival of Black Hand Kelly, played brilliantly by Billy Drago. This guy is so cool that I half expected him to pop up out of the ground and save everyone towards the end. The fact that the previous films, with the possible exception of the original, has had such a limited range of characters somewhat gives away the fact that these are low budget films. Here, it doesn't show that easily.
I like the details put into both plot and action of this film. Take for instance the bicycle ridden by Hiram, the crazy car/train hybrid used for one of the killings (of graboids that is) or the long saw stuck into the ground for that matter. The piano they didn't want to leave behind but were forced to give up (at first) adds another layer of humanity to the history of the characters.
The new species of graboid related baddies this time around is the infant baby size graboid that, when flying through the air, reminds me of Tuck and Roll in Pixar's classic A Bug's Life. Hilarious! Strange how fast they grow though. It must be very hard to grow at all under ground!
The only thing I came to think of during the course of the film, that I didn't particularly like was the miniature shot of the graboid bursting out of the ground under a bridge and then entering the ground on the other side. It looks fake and should have been left out of the finished product. I get the idea and it could have been a great shot, but it's all jerky and you can tell that the graboid's suspended by wires.
So what's up for Tremors fans next? Tremors: The TV Series on DVD would be a real treat, but will that ever happen as the series been canceled? Why not a Tremors remake then? One made with a budget of well over $100M and with CGI graboids? Who wouldn't want to see that?
Picnic at Hanging Rock (1975)
The scariest picnic ever!
It'd been quite some time since I last saw Picnic At Hanging Rock, but as soon as I heard that haunting Pan flute it all came back to me and I felt the goosebumps covering my skin once again. This film still has that level of quality to it, and I still consider it one of my absolute favorite films of all time.
As soon as you push that tempting Play button on your remote control as you're watching the Criterion Collection release of this film, you're thrown into a dream that starts as a fantasy but quickly turns into a nightmare as those girls disappear at hanging rock. You know that they're going to and there's nothing you can do to stop it...
I have discovered that most people speak of this film as drama, or maybe something in the line of an art film, which is funny to me as I've always seen it as a horror film. I mean, this film is really scary. Those girls disappeared and noone ever knew what happened to them. I remember thinking of this film as I saw The Blair Witch Project back in 99. Those kids also disappeared in the middle of the woods, only; in that film, you saw what happened to them, something that remains a mystery in this. That's what makes it so great.
It has to be told though, that the film does lose it's pace a bit towards the end as all the scenes are centered around the Appleyard school and leaving out on the mysterious Rock, but that is when the Pan flute is reintroduced, which keeps you in the meditative state you've been lulled into during the course of the film. There's so many scenes that you'll end up thinking about for hours to figure out what they really meant, only to come out empty handed, or possibly with a headache as a result. For instance: I've never understood the importance of the brother & sister link between the kids form the orphanage. If a film touches you in the way that this film does, you can't help but giving it the highest of praise and the 10/10 rating that it truly deserves. This is Peter Weir's one, and unfortunately only, true masterpiece as of yet; a film you must see before you leave the face of the earth and vanish into that dark shadowy place beyond; running into your very own Hanging Rock.
Creature from the Black Lagoon (1954)
A claw fitted hand made of plastic is reaching for you with a horrible score supporting it! Scary!
I watched this with my father recently and he had these memories of it being shown on TV as he was a kid. He told me of how scared he'd been and of the nightmares that followed. As we watched it together none of us could understand why, all we could do was to laugh at how silly everyone was and how horrible the score is. We both agreed that the creature was a piece of art though. This is one of the best movie monsters ever made put on film. Those eyes, and the blackness of the hollow mouth under water must have haunted the teenagers that saw this at theaters in 54-55.
Being that the old classics such as this aren't scary any more they have to have other qualities in order to stay interesting for the audiences of today. Creature from The Black Lagoon has some of that, but not overly much of it. It certainly has it's share of charm though. The scene where the creature is swimming under water as the unsuspecting Julie Addams is swimming above him at the surface is a classical one indeed.
I realize of course, that this film, as many others at the time, was shot to be presented in 3D, which is what makes some of the scenes in this film look especially silly. You know of what I'm speaking; the stretching arm scenes. Ooohhh.. I'm shaking!
I normally don't have a problem with a film being black & white as it shouldn't matter, but here... Well, it harms the picture as it could have been so much more beautiful if it had been shot in color. But as I'm not a film historian of sorts I don't know if the technology was available at the time. I don't have the exact date. If not, that's a shame, but if it was: Bad decision!
Why the characters in these films always have to bring home their scientific finds intact and alive at the cost of their colleagues' lives remains a mystery to me. 6/10
The Invisible Man (1933)
Invisible as early as 33???
As I watched this film, it really impressed me how well they'd manage to do these totally convincing invisibility effects as early as 1933! I could not believe it! I mean, I've always thought that the invisible man in this the first of Invisible Man films ran around in bandages and sunglasses all the time. I never expected to see what was inside! My god...
I knew that the invisible man's always had a thing for murder and mayhem once he's invisible, but not that they did all this in 1933. There are some great scenes here, like the first strike of mischief by the title character, and all the scenes at the Inn. The actors even manages to keep their eyelines fairly good throughout the film.
The lady keeping the inn with her husband, she's the only one overacting, but then again; maybe she were told to do so by the director in order to inject the film with some humor? It's a rather dark story otherwise, so that might have been a good decision if that was the case.
Exorcist II: The Heretic (1977)
Feels like it's cut and pasted together with scissors and glue!
Using Father Merrin as a narrator during the dreams created by the hypnosis isn't really a good idea. It's distasteful, but to use the same stock-footage shot from above, flying, over and over again in these dreams; that's plain stupid. It makes the film look really bad and it makes it look like it's badly edited as well, and it is! (Kind of scares me, as this is the status of the prequel at the moment if I'm not mistaken.) The fact that it's not even remotely scary due to the cheesy demon vocal effects doesn't help... ...and I really wanted to like this film. I've been a huge fan of the original for such a long time now without having seen this first of sequels that I felt that I had to see it, if only to know if it really was that bad that everyone was saying. Is it? I don't know what to say to that. Is it a good film? No. Is it a bad film? Well...
I can tell you what I liked about it:
I thought the visual effect were surprisingly effective given that the film is as old as it is, and I really loved the set design of the doctor's clinic, if that was a set at all. I thought that the concept for the african scenes were interesting and I... Well, I don't know if I have anything more positive to say about it really. It's one of those "So what films" that I've never understood.
Rånarna (2003)
Not a complete robbery of your precious time...
For all of you that don't speak swedish: The swedish ginal] title of this film; "Rånarna" translates into something in the line of "The Robbers". This fact is the main problem I have with the film, cause it's not really about the robbers at all. It's about a young woman working for the swedish police researching robberies. A regular desk job one would think, but this girl is soon out on the field taking matters into her own hands, as the story goes, even shooting one of the robbers... Exactly: We've seen this before. The fact that there's a rather interesting twist to the plot halfway through doesn't really help as the ending is just as cliché as the first two thirds of the film.
What saves it from being just another mainstream film is the fact that it's masterfully executed in all ways, that the actors are as great as they are and don't overact and that the director really manages to keep it as thrillingly exciting as it is for the most of the story.
One thing that I really loved about this film is the fact that it's music sets the right mood when it's needed, but is absent for the rest of the time, which gives a nice sense of reality to the shootouts and car-chases spread throughout the film. A nice touch! The fact that Michael Persbrandt is one of the few swedish actors that often tend to get typecasted sadly hurts the film as you know that he's not going to just play the boyfriend of the heroine and be a supporting character in the background, but that's something you have to neglect.
All in all it's an entertaining film that steals more money in it's plot than time from you. 7/10
Sisters (1972)
Sisters barely joined together at all!
If I was one half of the Siamese twin couple featured in this film I'd consider myself lucky. I mean, they're barely joined together at all. The poster art gives you another impression, but if you take a look at that scene in the film you'll see what I mean. There are Siamese twins that share the same brain. If that was the case here I'd see the problem, but hey, it's not. "What the devil hath joined together let no man cut asunder!" Well, if they hadn't, there wouldn't be a movie to begin with.
Brian de Palma's Sisters really turned into something completely different from what I'd originally expected. It starts with a rather brutal murder, with all it's bright colored red blood and it's shrieking moog score. You almost believe it to be the beginning of a 70's slasher movie with a Siamese twin twist. But the plot suddenly takes a completely different route and instead turns into a crime thriller in which a supporting character (or is she the leading lady now?)is bent on solving the murder. The police doesn't believe her story of course, they never do in these films, and the plot thickens as the body is hidden. The writer of the script for this film really tries to mess with your head at the end but doesn't quite nail it, at least not for me. But it's an honorable try.
The Hollywood reporter supposedly thought this film was "the most genuinely frightening film since Hitchcock's Psycho" according to the original poster. I didn't, but I had a great time watching it anyway, as it's certainly a gem. I suppose it was considered scary at the time, and much of that has passed since, but I seriously doubt that people 30 years from now will think that the scary films of today, such as Ju-On: The Grudge, Cabin Fever or Wrong Turn are silly. What do I know?
Leprechaun 6: Back 2 Tha Hood (2003)
Why go back 2 tha hood?
First of all, I'd really like to know why they had to go "back 2 tha hood". I mean, Leprechaun in The Hood was enough for me. On the other hand, this film is a lot better than the last one. There's that wonderfully animated opening of the film and there's a couple of elaborate visual effects shots that make for an impressive whole and that really shows that Lions Gate care for this series. In this film, they even remember to throw in the rainbow. There's also a scene in which the Leprechaun gets high, really high. That really enhance the story of the film in a nice way, cause these films are all about having fun and to entertain. Don't ever take these films serious!
The actors are all great and they don't really overact in any scene as far as I could tell. The story of the film is the one thing to complain about, as always with these kinds of films. An example: Why the characters in this film keep running away with the gold after that they have established that they have to return it in order to live is beyond me. For the next film they really need to come up with something fresh. I mean, there's only that much that you can take. It's just not enough to set the film in a different setting. Las Vegas, Space, The Hood...
Note to Lions Gate: Go back to the origin of the series and dig a little deeper into the real legends and tales of Leprechauns. It's never to late to invigorate a dying series. Just do it right the next time, for the fans.
Swimming Pool (2003)
The [R] rated unrated verison...
I've just seen the "unrated version" of this film. Haven't really seen the R rated one so I won't be making any comparisons (sorry) but I can tell you this: I was a bit disappointed in that it didn't seem at all like other films released unrated. Nudity was far from overused and there wasn't much in the way of violence or language either. I must admit, at first I was a bit confused. Who would ever want to see the R rated version of the film if this is the Unrated version. I can only imagine how dry that version must be. Compared with that version, this must be the very content of that pool. Ok, so you've got me, I did expect this film to be a little more of something that it wasn't. But what I got was in the end even more than I had expected, so I guess that wasn't that bad.
Swimming Pool is still just as "wickedly delicious" as Ebert & Roeper wants you to believe it is. It is a very smart film that, even though you might not know it, builds up a story that is stronger than it might appear to be. This film is all about the characters, their interaction with one another, atmosphere, tension and temptation. Charlotte Rampling plays her role with confidence and dares to do with it what other actresses in her age would not dare to do, (you'll see) as does the wonderful Ludivine Sagnier who is even braver.
The fact that the ending, which is a very clever one, enables you to go back and see the film a second, and maybe even a third time in a short period of time, makes it a must buy for all you horror and thriller fans out there that still hesitates about giving this a try. Go for it!
Cabin Fever (2002)
One gory masterpiece of a film! Well...almost.
Cabin Fever is one of those films that you'll never quite forget. You really cannot do that, it's too shocking, too graphic in it's nature. There's not that many films that you can compare it with. There's 28 Days Later of course, but that film took the same thematic elements and put it into a much grander scale than this film did. 28 Days Later's fictional disease affected an entire country, which in a way makes this film so much more intimate and claustrophobic. Being that these characters are together from the beginning of the film also makes you feel more for them as they gradually become infected. Supporting characters such as the "pancakes kid", the owners of that dreadful gas-station and the comedic police man with his bike all make this film feel like a part of the family of films that include films such as Texas Chain Saw Massacre, Wrong Turn and House of 1.000 Corpses. A truly frightening film that is.
The film is rather gory from time to time, but not overly gory. There's loads of blood and guts spilled and the make-up effects are fantastically gruesome. There's also a "love theme" by genre veteran Angelo Badalamenti.
The only thing that I find to complain about regarding this film is the ending.
** SPOILER**
When Jeff comes out of the cabin at the end, after having discovered the fact that he is the only survivor, screaming that he made it, you know what's going to happen as he walks out that door. It's pretty obvious he's going to be shot and thus a bit disappointing. I can't quite seem to remember if this is the final scene of the film or if there was yet another scene after that, but the facts remain as it takes the edge of a film that could have turned out to be a masterpiece if it had been slightly better executed.
Underworld (2003)
I can't believe I missed this theatrically!
I went into this film not having seen it in theatres and thus seeing it for the first time at home on an 80" screen with a superb Dolby Digital track supporting it. I had a good time, a great time! This is a wonderful film that succeeds in every way that others, so called "vampire/werewolf films" as of late didn't, Blade II included. (sorry Del Toro) It has a great cast headed by the beautiful Kate Beckinsale, striking visuals shot by the obviously very talented Tony Pierce-Roberts and the production- and set design is extraordinary. I mean, they've almost put as much detail and effort into this film as Jackson & co. did with The Lord of The Rings trilogy. And as you see it on screen, the past, the history of both species feels as real as ours.
This Len Wiseman, who is he? Never heard of him, yet he has to be one of the most gifted filmmakers today to pull off the difficult task of pitting Vampires and Lycans together in the same film and make it such a great film that it turned out to be. He did a great job, as did the rest of the crew and the cast. I feel like typing up this huge review for this film, if only to pay it tribute, but I think I've said all that needs to be said already. If you want to have a good time, rent, or just buy it for god's sake. All you need to do is see it!
The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King (2003)
I've had nightmares in which Seabiscuit wins The Academy Award for best Picture...
Wow! Where to begin? This is by far the best film I have ever seen. There are few words that can describe why tears kept falling from my eyes as the film unraveled upon the screen. I cannot remember the last time I felt so strongly for the characters of a film. Having now seen it twice, with tickets booked, I find myself wanting to buy every single little replica of the rings, the knives and the brooches worn in the films. Get it while you can! They're making history here.
Some friends made a comment about it being to long and that they'd thought the film to be over several times during the last third of the film. I find that genuinely surprising as I think it's way to short. Another friend made the comment that they could have cut out 30+ minutes out of the film to make it better. What 30 minutes would that have been I replied. ...No answer. You simply cannot cut even a second out of this film. Every moment from the opening scenes with Smeagol/Deagol to Sam's farewell at the end oozes of atmosphere and talent. It is hard to believe that they actually managed to pull it off. Peter Jackson and company actually made films out of The Lord of The Rings! And not only did they do that; they made some of the best films ever made. The Lord of The Rings: The Return of The King is a masterpiece, and I seriously doubt that anyone will ever be able to top this. No, noone will ever be able to do a better film than this!
The fact that the Academy might not even nominate Sean Astin for an Oscar scares the hell out of me! I've had nightmares in which Seabiscuit wins the Best Picture Award and where The Cat in The Hat takes home the Visual Effects. Members of the Academy: Please spare us from this tragedy coming true. Show us that you are among the millions, billions of people that will see this film before it leaves theaters for good, and please throw Andy Serkis a bone as well.