Reviews

For all such heist films (and this is a heist film when you boil it down) you have to suspend disbelief somewhat. Usually there's too many moving parts for the plan to ever go as perfectly in real life as they do on the screen but that's okay because you're watching a movie and you're here for entertainment not realism. Triple Frontier however failed to draw me in far enough to suspend that disbelief and the primary reason is through some poor writing and plot points.

Triple Frontier's premise is sound enough for a heist/action film but the decisions the characters make throughout the film and their attitude toward their narrative situations make it impossible to believe the characters are the ex-elite military types they supposed to be. All the primary cast are competent enough actors to pull off playing an ex-elite US soldier character unfortunately they all phone it in so poorly that it's all too easy to see through them.

A solid premise for a 3/5 star film ruined by poor plotting and mediocre action takes it down to 1/5 from me. It's a turkey!

Blue Mountain State was a series that was absolutely hilarious, celebrating the college campus drinking culture of many US establishments of higher education, bro culture, near complete disregard of women beyond their physical attributes and despite purportedly being about a football team a single game was seen across 3 complete series. Backed up by a cast of 1 dimensional characters the TV show BMS was a hedonistic feast for male 13-20 something viewers everywhere.

The Rise of Thadland however did not capture this same magic in any respect. Although featuring that same cast of characters they seem slightly out of place in this new feature, hollow renditions of previously well loved caricatures. The plot of the film is simple enough and totally predictable in as many aspects of a traditional BMS episode. However where the TV show's plot lines were funny the film's felt as though a single BMS episode had been stretched to the 90 minute mark. Unfortunately such stretching left the film mostly mirthless and in many respects just plain sad as there weren't enough jokes to go around despite some brief moments of hilarity.

Overall I give credit to the showrunners in trying to milk what was a very entertaining golden calf. However they ended up merely flogging a dead horse.

I was born 11 years after this came our and watched it for the first time 25 years after that, a mere fortnight before the remake is released.

I can see why this film was an instant classic. It remains true to its era and although it appears a little dated today it will forever be regarded as a pinnacle of Kiwi Cinema.

If you've ever lived in New Zealand you'll be able to say "I've been there!" as the characters wind their way down the country from tip to tail. I might be coming to the party 35 years late but even I was able to recognise streets in Auckland, Dunedin and on the West Coast. Reminisce about your own road trips, adventures, excursions and joy rides in a 1978 Mini Cooper.

If you're Kiwi, you can't not love it.

In an era when the zombie trope is close to becoming overplayed and hackneyed this film does nothing to save the genre. Once considered horror films zombie movies have transitioned to comedy, perhaps originally in the recent era thanks to Pegg and Frost's brilliant 'Sean of the Dead.' However Cooties fails as both a horror movie and as a horror comedy.

Elijah Wood looks very much like Frodo Baggins after a haircut and the rest of the cast are nobodies who don't lend much to an already thin plot line. Credit does go to Leigh Whannel for playing the socially awkward 'brains of the bunch' well although this is not enough to save the film.

The alleged hook of this film is that the zombies are all children, those having survived puberty not being vulnerable to the virus. Anyone would think that a horde of zombie kids running amok in a school would be enough for gore filled laughs whilst conforming to the standard pattern of zombie movies the world over. However the laughs are few and far between. The film also tries to be scary and is filled with many of the clichés of any horror flick since the invention of film. Yet these elements of the movie are forced at best and a long way from striking terror into the hearts of the viewer. That none of the main characters come close to dying also removes any remaining facade of credibility to this turkey of a film.

I do not recommend this film at all. 3/10

Dark Matter has potential but lacks originality along with a host of other necessary facets to make it a worthwhile watch.

It presents pretty much as a 'Firefly' rip off. Call me biased but I never really saw the hype about Firefly. My one line review of that show is - "If everyone is Han Solo then no one can be Han Solo." Dark Matter has a lot of Han Solos as well from the start and this does not bode well. The Firefly comparisons continue endlessly. They're in space on a spaceship, there are big space corporation/s which prey on helpless independent colonies, the main characters try to do what's right whilst also looking our for their own interests etc etc. There is even a large degree of character overlap. There's the strong female protagonist flying the ship (Two or Zoe), the hard headed guy who likes his guns (Three or Jayne), the girl who is good with machines (and as Dark Matter has a lower budget than Firefly is also the girl who gets inexplicable visions about stuff)(Five or Kaylee and River Tam rolled into one), there's also the friendly black guy who has advice for people (Six or Shepherd Book) and so on and so forth.

Don't get me wrong I like the premise for the show, waking up on a spaceship with no memories and put together with a crew of people whom you don't know if you can trust etc. I don't care that the special effects aren't incredible or that the actors aren't actually that good. The sci-fi element also appeals to me a lot. Another good point was that the original plot line wasn't contained to one episode but spanned two. That kind of serial is necessary for programmes to succeed today.

However I feel that the serial nature of Dark Matter may end and it will degenerate into a procedural Space - Cowboy - Action Drama with a new story resolved each week within 40 minutes with some, occasionally referenced, ties linking a vague over arching plot throughout the series. To be honest that's not great and probably wouldn't keep my attention.

Thus it is hard to rate this programme. There are both good points and bad. Things can only be rated positively retrospectively. "Potential" doesn't get you any points in my book as it has to be delivered upon.

So a 6.5/10 But rounding down to 6 for the myriad of reasons above and because the world shouldn't give anyone handouts.

Previously I have never seen an American film billed as a 'Black Comedy' which succeeded to fulfill on its promise. Anything described as a black comedy and coming from America could only ever be a tragedy when viewed and would be thus vastly disappointing in my opinion. This compared of course to British comedies of the same vein, for example the final series of 'Blackadder' or 'Sean of the Dead.' However 'The Voices' managed to deliver a definite comic element despite the grisly subject matter and tragedy of mental illness.

Ryan Reynolds convincingly performs the well meaning, bemused yet dangerously unstable Jerry as well as delivering great voice acting for all the "voices" by which Jerry is tormented. Reynolds is supported by a cast of competent actors and the plot isn't complicated enough to detract from the sad situation in which Jerry finds himself or the darkly sinister comedy which pervades the film.

Hopefully this heralds a new era in American film making and we can see new films of this ilk in the near future.

In summary, a light hearted if dark film with some confident if not brilliant acting throughout. A solid 6.5/10. Not bad for a comedy.

This is a difficult programme to review as it contains a diverse arena of themes, characters, actors and plot lines all condensed into a mere 10 episodes concerning the New York Symphony Orchestra. It is also difficult to determine what I managed to derive from the programme. Not being an aficionado of orchestra's I could not relate to the dynamics of professional orchestral musicians, not being from the bohemian or bourgeois sub-cultures of New York I struggled to empathise with many subplots and minor characters. Yet despite this, 'Mozart in the Jungle' was an engaging and subtly funny series which above all else managed to engender in me a new interest in classical music. Something I will pursue and investigate into the future. This alone makes 'Mozart in the Jungle' a very worthy piece of programming.

I won't waste too much of your time with a long review. The plot of this film will undoubtedly be covered in other reviews and the synopsis/summary sections so I won't write about them either.

Let me just say that I'm a 23 year old guy with a stoic approach to life and a cynical worldview. Yet this film has brought me closer to tears than anything else I've seen since I last watched Forrest Gump years ago.

Epic raw performances from the entire cast, Bill Murray especially. Definitely a must see for 2014 and an brilliant first directorship for Theodore Melfi.

What I liked most about this film was that it took a more practical approach to the subject of a vampire outbreak than most and was also told partly from the perspective of the vampires rather than the humans fighting them.

The film posed challenging questions as to what would really happen if a vampire outbreak did occur in our modern society in a widespread fashion. How would society adapt to escape the sun? Will humans assimilate into the new world order or have to be hunted for their blood? and more importantly questions such as; What happens when the blood runs out? What happens to starving vampires? There were solid, if not spectacular, performances throughout the film from Willem Defoe, Ethan Hawke and Sam Neil and the sinister atmosphere that pervaded throughout, helped by ample fluorescent lighting, was great.

I think the film fell down as it has a poor conclusion that, although hopeful, left things unresolved. The Spierg Brothers could also have delved deeper into vampire society as the new blood fueled world order was only touched upon. I'd have liked to have seen how a world populated by immortals would function. A level of dystopia was portrayed but the surface was really only scratched on this one.

I give Daybreakers 6.5/10, although I round down to 6 as I can't conscientiously give it a 7.

I think the premise for this show was fantastic. The author with writers block turning amateur detective for inspiration being a good means for both comedy and introducing new characters or plot-lines.

However the comedy was usually quite dark so that it rarely evoked a laugh and merely placed the antics of the characters in the category of absurd. To be fair to the show there were a few truly hilarious episodes but they were few and far between.

The characters themselves were actually quite pathetic in a number of ways spending their time drugged up or slightly boozed for the entirety of the series and all having multiple character flaws. I also found Jonathan Ames naming his primary protagonist after himself a stroke of colossal narcissism.

Overall not great. But it fills a space and time.

'Under the Skin' had a host of great reviews and an engaging trailer that made me want to watch. Unfortunately no one told me it was an 'art' film. This means that there was a lack of a few essential features that tend to make films good. Things like; a plot, character development, story structure, an ending or resolution and potentially some backstory of any kind for a situation which is actually quite confusing if you haven't already read the book that this film is based on. Based on VERY loosely. Apart from both being set in Scotland and men being preyed upon there aren't too many similarities which tie the two together. I had read the book and was disappointed.

Angelina Jolie doesn't actually have to act much. All she does is make small talk and take her clothes off, then put them back on. Her character does develop through the course of the film. However there is so little dialogue or explanation for her situation that I remained confused and bored for the film's duration.

The made it to the requisite 90mins despite its lack of a plot through a tonne of scenes and shots which were unnecessarily long, went nowhere and added little. This is what makes the film an "Art" film I suppose but god it was boring. I struggled through until the end mostly because there were a number of scenes where things looked like they would be picking up and some explanation might be given. But no. When the film ends it does abruptly and left me unsatisfied with the time and money I had spent.

If you like "Art" films you might like this film. If you're like normal people and like regular films with a plot then this film is probably not for you.

This film is pretty typical of the High School comedy. Some cheap gags centered around toilet humour or sex, a cast of reasonably 1 (or if you're lucky 2) dimensional characters and a heartwarming albeit totally predictable conclusion after 90 minutes.

I'm not quite sure why several other reviewers are commenting on Katie Findlay's performance. It hit the top of the bell curve. For those not statistically inclined that means it was average, neither good nor bad but smack on the Mean. The film's lead actor, John Karna, was chosen for the ability to pull a realistic 'cum' face reliably. Considering that was his primary expression for the majority of the movie he was a good choice, his acting ability otherwise. So so. The only consistently funny performance was provided by Craig Roberts who is actually endowed with the ability to act. I've seen him in a couple of other pictures and think this kid has a long acting career ahead of him.

The film is essentially a rip off of 'Groundhog Day' which is of course a better film. For 'Premature' to really succeed it could have lowered it's own bar and fully embraced the toilet humour motif. Other films have done this and been hilarious, Premature got caught up in the emotions too much. If it had followed Groundhog's course more similarly and become an example of total plagiarism then the film would have been better although never released. The other option was to embrace the whole 'curse' idea, which was introduced toward the end of the film, and work some gags out of that. However 'Premature' opted for a watered down combination of all three leaving the viewer somewhat unsatisfied.

If you go into this not expecting much (because not much is all you'll get) then you won't be disappointed.

4.5/10 rounded up to 5

It's films like these that make me ask 'Why do directors/producers/writers try and fill comedies with sentimental claptrap?'If they want to make a comedy they should make something funny. If they want to make a tear-jerking drama about a granddaughter struggling with her lifelong string of failures and her grandmother's alcoholism then they should release all the stops and make something truly tragic.

Tammy tries to do both and therefore fails twice.

Melissa McCarthy is a hilarious actor and there are moments of brilliance in this film however they are separated by long periods of sentimentality for which i did not sign up.

I hope her next film is a bigger success.

I saw the trailer for this film months before it was released and was quivering with anticipation until I saw it on opening night. I was not disappointed. This film exceeded all my expectations.

Although obviously aimed at children and acting as a superb marketing gimmick (I wanted to blow the dust off my old Lego sets the moment the film was over) the film held a coherent plot line, excellent cast of voice actors, a clever mix of stop-motion and smooth animation, a great score and enough laughs and adult pitched humour to keep everybody entertained from beginning to end.

The creators ability to poke fun at themselves and the Lego universe in which they were operating belied the high level of planning and forethought that had been used to develop this film.

I have watched The Lego Movie twice already and know that in a few months it will bear watching a third time.

My main problem with this programme is that it was obviously aimed at an American audience yet it still retains the subtlety and charm of a British comedy hence its watch-ability.

David Cross plays Todd Margaret very well portraying his pitiful nature superbly. However Todd's "increasingly poor decisions" are really that he keeps lying to people over trivial matters and is an idiot. It's the usual question that appears in much of comedy TV and cinema "Why don't you just tell the truth you blithering idiot?" The premise that Todd doesn't know anything about Britain and its culture is acceptable, and this is where the majority of the comedy stems from. However I find it difficult to believe that anybody is thick and gullible enough to be strung along as much as Todd Margaret is whilst also being so totally ignorant of British culture. Calling football soccer is one thing but Todd might as well be on a different planet considering the apparent culture shock he appears to be suffering.

Had the show been made slightly differently it could have been truly great. If for example Todd Margaret wasn't American but had say been sent down from Scotland to London and had problems with the English vs Scottish culture the show would have been far superior. Todd's American accent is very grating amongst all the English ones.

I'll probably keep watching but won't be anticipating any BAFTA's for the show

It's not often you find a film with no redeeming qualities or so many inexplicable features. For Example: -A black person in feudal China -A man who for no reason can change his skin into bronze on a whim -The entire population of China speaking English with American accents, although sometimes they speak Chinese and then revert back to English just because they can. -That prosthetic arms can be made of iron and when forced onto an amputee's stumps function perfectly.This is again in feudal China. -Also that once iron prostheses have been cleaved to your stumps you become proficient in unarmed combat -The existence of nylon tights and stockings in feudal China -1980s glam rock hair styling in feudal China -Did I mention that the prostheses have magical powers (not explained at all) and can somehow summon tornado's or something?

There was no coherent plot, zero opportunity to relate to the characters, a cast of what might as well have been tree stumps for the level of acting they delivered and a tonne of nonsensical choreographed violence. I accept that this last is usual of a martial arts film but at the same time added little and wasted time. The films score, celebrated by critics apparently, was not impressive as far as I'm concerned. That it sometimes featured rap songs or sci-fi esque synthesiser tones, amongst the regular backing, was also distracting and nonsensical.

There were also a number of pieces of symbolism which were entirely forced upon the audience. For example the way two dead bodies fell to form a Yin & Yang sign. Again these added nothing to the film and in fact detracted from it in the fashion in which they were delivered to the screen. I have seen more cogent symbolism in episodes of Family Guy.

As much as I like to see scantily clad women this use of cheap tricks to gain attention was gratuitous. That the one of the films major settings was a whorehouse explains this but at the same time it was not done tastefully. The desperation with which the director, RZA, tries to attract attention is pitiful. Someone also needs to tell him that split screen and screen-wipes are great tools to use in a comic book child's cartoon but aren't needed in grown-up's films.

Russel Crowe's performance was perhaps the only one which calls for any merit. However why he sullied his career by appearing in this example of cinema bilge is beyond me. His character also adds very little, his only motivation being greed and the small size of his role not allowing him to rescue the film. RZA appearing in his own movie is an act of colossal narcissism. That he wrote the film doesn't confer upon him the ability to act. Something he proved throughout the film. He can't direct either considering the bile he released. On a different note, in my opinion RZA isn't a real name. It's an acronym. Whatever RZA is attempting to prove by calling himself RZA is irrelevant. I think it makes him look stupid.

I considered at some point during the film that this might be spoof of the entire martial arts genre yet the film takes itself far too seriously for that. The opening and closing credits make it appear as though RZA was attempting a grindhouse style but doesn't follow through to any other portion of the film. I only managed to finish this film because I was writing this very review during the second half.

Don't watch this film. It will be a waste of your time. RZA shouldn't be allowed to direct any more if this is the standard we can expect from him.

Winning 2 Oscars and a placing high on several lists of the greatest films of all time or the decade etc this 2 hour epic was as dull as ditchwater. I know a lot of readers will criticise this opinion and cite the style of direction and raw performance of all players as reasons to love the film. However I was not engaged, didn't relate to the characters and despite usually abhorring people who perpetually play with their phone whilst watching movies spent the second hour catching up on my wiki reading.

That de Niro gained 60lbs for the film impressed me yet not enough to like the movie

This is a French film in that nothing happens for 2.5 hours but it makes you think. It's filmed in English but the fact that it had a French director probably accounts for the style.

The film is ultimately about happenstance, the choices we make and what they could lead too. There are elements in there about string theory, the beginning and end of the universe and therefore quantum mechanics. However rather than occurring at the particular level the events and interactions making up the film and possibilities take place between human beings. Rather than the few outcomes that could possibly occur from the entanglement of electrons or protons at the subatomic level this film deals with the truly infinite outcomes of what might be.

There is some mention of life before birth and life after death but this is only touched upon and not explained in any fashion. There are also some scenes which appear to involve time travel, or something similar. I thought these elements didn't add much too the film yet didn't detract from them either. Their presence was mildly confusing or perhaps irritating but probably added just a little bit more of the unknown into the whirling mass of possibilities in life that 'Mr Nobody' attempts to present.

I liked this film and will probably watch it again sometime. 8/10

This is not the best film I've seen. Its wooden performances justly won it the 1999 Razzie for worst acting. The story progresses rapidly although there is no proper plot development. The film thus remains quite hollow. The film ends with the viewer feeling dissatisfied as it the premise held much promise and it could have resulted in a far more entertaining piece if it were handled differently.

However. And it is a big However. This film was released in 1998. For anyone who's ignorant enough to not realise the significance of this I'll spell it out for you. 1998 is three years before 2001, and 2001 is the year when 9/11 happened.

This film therefore concerns the tricky concepts of terrorism and Islamic violence, jihad and stereotyping before the War on Terror began. I know from my political studies classes that American's seem to believe that this began after 9/11 and they would be right. However the "religion of peace" has ostensibly been at war with America for far longer.

Another tricky subject covered in this film is the infringement of civil rights by the government in combating the threat of terrorism. The right to habues corpus, to not be tortured or the right to privacy are covered in The Siege amongst others.

The film is not very good but serves as an eerie predictor of the post 9/11 world with such rights being increasingly infringed upon and no end in sight for the Islamic Jihad against the West.

Why this film is labelled with the genre of comedy unfathomable to me. It is all thriller. A tense, dark and ultimately disturbing film. I'm sure if it had been made differently it could easily have been funnier but in its current format it contains no mirth whatsoever.

The plot of the film is undoubtedly summarised in other reviews and by IMDb itself so I won't waste your time here. I will say that it escalates slower than I might have liked and ends abruptly and shockingly a short while after things had gotten very tense and I had started to pay proper attention and sit on the edge of my seat in anticipation.

I enjoyed this film but it is probably not something I would watch again. I will however be on the look out for more films by E. L. Katz as if they're anything like this then they're going to be just as dark and stomach twisting. A thrill ride if ever there was one.

Firstly let me say that this film can only ever flop dead outside of New Zealand. It's humour is directed at New Zealanders and only them so anyone from outside these islands will only be able to watch as all the jokes fly far over their heads.

Unfortunately this film reaches too far in an attempt to combine an action with a horror/slasher film. As such it doesn't have enough action or gore to fully fit into either category and unfortunately the comedy is often sub par. While either plot could have been funny and successful singularly, there is not enough time inside 90 minutes to do them justice together.

Temuera Morrison performs well, as per usual, and is surrounded by a cast of unknown kiwi actors, which is also usual for a purely NZ film, yet unfortunately even he cannot carry this entire movie to brilliance.

I wish the cast and crew well and hope their next effort hits the mark spot on as this one was damned close.

This film was more a tragedy than a comedy. It follows the trials of Scott an overweight D&D aficionado who lives utterly for and mostly in the fantasy world he has created for his fellow gamers. He has no girlfriend, prospects, true friends or social life outside his D&D set. Whenever he is faced with any challenge to his world he flies into a childlike tantrum only serving to make things worse. Because of this last I had very little pity for Scott and in most cases thought he received his just desserts.

The plot of the film doesn't really progress anywhere although Sam Eidson's portrayal of Scott was superb. The film revolves utterly around Scott so the poor performances of the remaining cast go unnoticed.

This film is not a "Comedy." I did not laugh once. Considering the sad and depressing nature of Scott's life and the fact that he appears to learn no real lesson or change any facet of his character by the film's conclusion it can only be seen as a tragedy. And a poor one at that.

Brilliant special effects and action sequences.

Robert DJ did his usual Tony Stark act of ego and arrogance and had enough one liners to make the audience chuckle enough Sir Ben should have had a bigger part but probably wasn't allowed as he'd have stolen Robby DJ's thunder and the movie is called Iron Man...

Weak on plot but then so were Iron Man's 1 & 2.

Highly entertaining, but if you want a deep and introspective look at modern day society or something vaguely realistic then probably not your cup of tea. If you want action, one liners and you enjoyed Iron Mans 1 and or 2 then buckle in for another arcreactor fueled ride into the stratosphere

Yeah, the title pretty much sums it up. I was sucked in by a good trailer and wasted my time watching this rubbish although I failed to finish it.

Lack of acting by everyone involved, the total lack of a plot in any sense at all and a total lack of context or explanation has left me wondering why David Cronenberg deigned to direct this cinematic bilge.

Don't bother under any circumstances.

>

>

>

Basic premise: Man invents technology to go inside other people's memories and gets stuck in one. Whoops. Now he's got to find a way out.

Sounds like cheap science fiction but it is filmed incredibly well with outstanding cinematography. People are obviously going to draw comparisons to the overrated (in my opinion at least) Inception because of the going inside other people's heads bit. However due to the far lower budget, this film doesn't rely on millions of dollars of special effect and still manages to create a sense of dread and unpredictability that surprised me. Especially as I normally guess the end of a film before it ends ruining it for myself.

The actors, most of whom I can't recall seeing before, play their parts superbly and I was completely sucked into the story and found myself reconsidering it repeatedly over the following days. Something that not many films evoke in me.