Reviews

Cynical science meets the obscure and dark forces of the spirit world when Lars von Trier takes us into a fascinating and unique world of the Kingdom, Denmark's largest hospital. This is a real place, by the way. But we get to see it in a shaky, hand-held - but remarkably watchable rendering with supernatural overtones - involving ghosts, demons and Satan himself.

Riget (Kingdom) is definitely one of the best shows to come out of Denmark ever. It is written and directed perfectly, with a perfect cast, and a - ahumm - not always perfect taste. Too bad it was never finished. Von Trier was already hitting high marks when directing this wonderful series.

I would recommend this to anyone that likes to follow horror-comedy shows of odd nature. It is probably more similar to a Lynchian universe than conventional horror genres. There is a lot of irony and symbolism in here, so bring your patience and please allow some silly behavior. It is all entertainment.

I give it an unjust 10 out of 10. A fair grade would probably be an 8 out of 10. The visual effects have aged badly and some plot points were just stupid. But it has mostly held up and stood its ground against time. Enjoy!

Trier's English-languaged debut has been praised by many, but NOT by me. This is the essence of mediocrity: forgettable, not moving, not interesting, not dramatic. There is really no point to this. The cinematography is beautiful, the editing is quite inspired and interesting, but the script is awfully bland and the otherwise fantastic actors and actresses are wasted and utilized in a horrid way. Eisenberg is just plain old Eisenberg; Byrne can't save his character; and worst of all: Huppert is reduced to a boring character with no real depth or energy. It's all so incredibly lame. There are a few subplots in it, but it doesn't feel like it has a real plot or story that can drive the additions. Besides, the entire thing with the youngest son is that he likes to play Skyrim and he writes bad poetry that brings him success with a girl (realistic much??). This entire premise is horrible and made me sad for whoever wrote this uninspired crap: it's a big bowl of nothing. It's worse than nothing, it's boring, a void, a complete waste of time and Huppert. I hated it and almost couldn't finish it. Besides, a bunch of morals to the story did bother me: none of the characters are likable, but I feel like they were meant to be. The journey is not a journey, but a stagnant and static group of characters in a dull setup. It's not bad. It's just mediocre. Incredibly mediocre. Normally, the quite impressive productive forces behind a movie like this can make it count, but this one will be forgotten completely in five years - only remembered by the handful of people that could relate to one of the characters. I couldn't... Five out of ten. And maybe four on a bad day.

This is an honest review with no prejudice. I just wanted to be entertained... But Suicide Squad feels misguided from the beginning. It only puts focus on two characters while ignoring the rest, making them feel paper thin and completely unused. The most interesting characters are ignored completely, not even getting proper background stories, while the most boring characters, especially Will Smith's, get all the attention. One of them, Harley Quinn, is of course played wonderfully by the actress portraying her, but the role has been written terribly - just like the Joker is written in a terrible way. Besides from sketching an unbelievable and mythologically inaccurate relationship between Harley and the Joker, Suicide Squad puts unnatural focus on the incredibly uninteresting relationship between Harley Quinn and Deadshot, which seems reachy and pathetically boring from the beginning. It also tries to convert the two awesome villains into disguised heroes - which is the worst thing a movie like this could have done. It is also obvious which scenes were re-shot as several jokes feel crammed in there in order to compete with the Marvel cookie cutter franchise. I hated this movie. And I also hated BvS and the latest 80 movies from Marvel. Will stop paying to see this crap from now on...

What did I just watch? I'm still not sure. Less than one minute into this movie it becomes clear that it is going to be an odd experience that will either amuse and entertain or completely throw people off. When a seemingly dead body farts so bad that it can propel itself and another man forward like a motor boat, it tends to generate division among viewers. Behind the silliness of Swiss Army Man is a sad story that will appeal to lovers of drama, but all wrapped in a fantasy universe that will appeal to people who are into odd cinema. It is not completely unlike Horns in the sense that the movie doesn't fit prepackaged conventions and transcend them. But it is not as great as it wants to be. My wife thought it was great. I just found it good. But either way we are dealing with the right end of the scale. I give it a six out of ten.

I went into this expecting nothing at all. And that was also what I got out of it. I hate to say it, especially because of the gender- discussions that surrounded this release, but the critics were too soft on this turd. It doesn't deserve a rating as high as 5. It is both extremely bad compared to the original movie, but also when seen as a stand-alone feature. It just sucks. The jokes aren't funny at all, the special effects somehow looks worse than in the original, and the four female leads are each boring and terrible in their own ways. The script has been written like it was meant to be a turd from the beginning. The plot is boring and bland. The jokes are mistimed and so extremely silly that a grown-up cannot enjoy - like they are meant to only make small children laugh (I mean age ten and below). For example: there is a returning joke where the hot male secretary covers his EYES when he doesn't want to HEAR something (he is SOOOO stupid that he cannot figure out how to cover his ears or how the senses work); this terrible joke is repeated several times (which makes it so much worse). Small children would probably blow milk through their noses... Grown-ups sits there all frozen... No laughs, only coughs and people walking out to spend their time on something better. This movie is a disaster from start to finish. Not only did they completely misunderstand the spirit of the Ghostbusters, but they also managed to make the Wayans Brothers look like Oscar material. I cannot describe how much I loathe this project. I will never see it again; I will not be seeing the sequel. I hated everything about it!

I didn't know the story of Florence, so I started out treating this like any other drama/comedy. And in many ways it is an example of a movie that finds a very good balance between the serious and the funny. I don't care if it was accurate: it was the definition of "good, not great."

This is one of those movies that both takes you by surprise, while at the same time being incredibly predictable. During the first five minutes of the movie I easily guessed how it was going to end. It was incredibly straightforward and open for an easy read. But the classical structure and nature of the story is instantly forgiven because the characters, acting and comical parts work so well.

I found myself laughing at times where I thought I would find it tiresome. The off-key singing by Meryl Streep is awe-strikingly bad, especially considering the fact that she sings like really well. The acting by Hugh Grant is also good and the relationship between Florence and himself was interesting to explore. I also loved the pianist played by the guy from Big Bang Theory (can't remember his name). It all worked well and made for a good watch.

I will definitely see it again sometime. But not during the next five years, that's for sure.

I recently watched this to see if it was better than The Martian, because the title suggested that it would be similar. But it's not a quality picture at all. I would go as far as to say that it is just plain awful. It is not as great as the rating suggests; doesn't even come close.

Let's start with the fact that it just sucks, even for a sixties sci-fi movie. The main reasons are clear: it has low production value, it makes tons of scientific mistakes that would make children laugh - and it is just acted incredibly poorly. The very fact that the space-Crusoe can breathe on Mars says it all. It's just ridiculous. It is the exact opposite of splendid old-timer sci-fi movies like A Space Odyssey...

Besides, I can't even begin to criticize the animal cruelty that went into this production. The monkey is clearly suffering in that space suit, and it is depressing to watch that suffering. This movie is a prime example of selfish people exploiting animals to make a buck on some crappy movie that people will never love. I do not consider the suffering of innocent animals a treat. Go screw yourselves, even if you were from another time!!!

It's clear by now: I hated everything about this movie. Go see The Martian instead.

I am a huge horror enthusiast and was excited about this release when I heard about it. Urge (2016) is about an obnoxious capitalist that goes to some weird island with his spoiled friends and unlikely girlfriend/secretary to drink expensive champagne and fool around. Instead they find a sinister night club where they are given a new drug that takes away their inhibitions. This premise sounds interesting because the drug, contrary to alcohol, doesn't turn people into drooling idiots at the same time...

Alas, this is an amateurish project that looks, sounds and feels like something out of a lower grade film school. This project would not have passed the final exam. I feel sorry for the director and people involved – especially Pierce Brosnan who is obviously desperate for work now. It is a dreadfully made movie that just oozes of cheapness and bad writing and acting. None of the characters seem real or even possible to accept as characters. It is all so unrealistic and trivial at the same time. The title role should say it all: Danny Masterson! And consider the fact that the club was supposed to seem cool, when it just seemed like a sleazy fetish club. The whole thing is so misdirected and lame that I couldn't even finish it. And I have finished some awful movies in my time, believe me. I have even seen all three Human Centipede movies from back to back, for example. So what does that say about this one? I am sad to say this: I give it one stars out of ten possible.

The Offering is one of the worst horror movies I have seen in 2016. This one isn't as low budget as many of the crappy ones I have seen this year, but it sure takes the prize on being half-finished and sloppy. It is, in all fairness, also sort of an amateurish Indonesian production.

Even though it doesn't exactly look cheap, the entire project is, from a technical standpoint, utterly terrible. The cinematography and camera work is quite decent for the most part, but the acting, direction, plot and "scary" parts are dreadful. The horror part seems like a badly filmed spoof (the lighting is bad and the shots are often badly executed). The reactions of the characters are also incredibly unbelievable (no details given, since it is spoiler material). And the plot, oh my god. It was so amateurish... Like a bunch of children sat down and listed a plot that they thought was clever, while it was really just incredibly lame.I will not spoil the disappointment for you. Let me just say that I hated everything about it.

I give it two out of ten. I feel this is the right grade.

The Invasion sounds promising enough and could have been awesome. But this is basically just a bland and dull version of Invasion of the Body Snatchers.

I will tell you about it casually. The acting is quite good for the most part. Kidman and Craig are excellent as usual. But that pretty much sums up all the positive factors. The negative factors are much more dominant. The characters are a bit stiff and so is the entire setup. The cinematography is good, but the editing is sometimes dreadful. There are some idiotic plot holes and details that made me think a great deal about the level of inconsistency in the movie. Oh yeah, and the whole thing was incredibly boring. There is nothing that makes us remember anything from it. It is just so incredibly dull. For a horror movie it doesn't feature any psychological terror or gore at all: it is, like I said, a trip to Dullsville.

This one deserves a four out of ten. It is not even mediocre, but lazy and pointless. I hated it. But it is not Tommy Wiseau-style either; there is some technical insight behind the craftsmanship. But please stick to the original remake from the seventies!

I liked most parts, especially the plot, the cast, the characters, the visuals and the spectacular action sequences. Indeed, I was blown away by some action scenes. We are dealing with incredible CGI and good fight choreography. And we did not see the best parts in the trailer. I love that. The mood was fitting and the humor toned down a bit (fewer one-liners than in AoU. I loved that the movie seemed to address every single movie in this universe. I cared about the conflict and felt invested. Even though the movie was ridiculously long, it was intense and exciting.

But a few things made me cringe. Ant-Man, Black Panther and Spider-Man felt shoe-horned (people are right to say this) into the movie in a shameless way; it was all so superficial. Scarlet Witch, Hawkeye and Vision were as awful as ever.

The actual civil war bit was also a tad disappointing. It felt obvious that none of the heroes were in any real danger, and that none of the combatants were trying to harm each other seriously. Yes, some of them gets hurt - but we can never fully view this as actual damage done with intent. Not until the very end did I feel that someone could easily die from this situation; and even then news of future movie releases had spoiled who will NOT die. The MCU has again spoiled the fun for the viewers by announcing upcoming movies too soon.

The conflict between Rogers and Stark was believable. Even though I was hoping for a different outcome to the final conflict, I didn't feel cheated.

Like I said, seven out of ten. It is a reasonable grade. I will probably acquire the movie later for a re-watch.

More CW Garbage I have almost seen four episodes of the show, so I am no expert. But let me say that this show has been dreadful in every way. Not even a boy under the age of ten would be able to enjoy this garbage. It is even worse than Arrow, no... it is even worse than Supergirl.

The plot is so ridiculous and pathetic that it cannot be said enough. The entire premise is laughable. The characters are also completely stupid and uninteresting. And forget about good action. The CGI is so bad that it is embarrassing to look at. We are off to a terrible start.

The choice of actors is also weird. I hate attacking the actors and not characters, but this time it seems mandatory. They decided to make fun of people by casting the ugliest women they could find, spicing it with the worst male actors they could find. Let us comment on the characters like this... Featuring: Tommy Wiseau as the bad guy (go see The Room), weird chin-girl with fat face as someone from the League of Assassins, horse face girl with huge teeth that are showing ALL the time as some badly animated Egyptian bird woman (I am not making it up), the guy from the terrible Superman movie as a ripoff of Ant-Man/Iron Man, the two guys from Prison Break as Captain Freeze and Heat Signal (shudder), Donnie Darko's father (oh wait!), and more terrible actors that no one likes or could ever care for. I seriously disliked every actor and character on the show.

If you have ANY sense of quality, you will hate this show. Legends of Tomorrow is pure garbage. I give it a two out of ten.

Having seen several full episodes of Arrow, I feel comfortable calling it pure garbage with no redeeming qualities. A rating above eight at IMDb is a proof that the site is vulnerable to exploitation by fan boys and cruel jokers. Even if you cut the score in half it is still a bit high. And no, I am not exaggerating to make it seem shocking...

I am speaking the truth. Arrow is quite simply one of the worst written shows I have seen. The direction and writing is so terrible that it seems like a cruel joke. No actor or actress could pull of these characters and lines without falling into a deep sea of cheese. The story is also bad... very bad... Most of the time they seem to make things up as they go along, other times they just steal story lines from Batman.

Are they making it up as they go along? Are they trying to see how bad they can write before teens stop watching? Is this a social experiment? The drama is 90210 stuff, but acted terribly and done with no sense of direction. The writers are obviously either untalented people or smoking monkeys behind typewriters. Please be monkeys! The characters are thin, flat and pathetic. The acting is terrible, but obviously caused by the direction. The cheap budget shows, because almost every scene is shot inside and with bad lighting covering the terrible fight choreography. The flashback gimmick is annoying and done in a way that seems bland and boring.

In a show like this the action could have saved the entire thing, if only it didn't suck as much as it does. But not only is this more of an emo/teen drama soap than an action show (which shows when there is almost no action sequences), but it is even bad when it tries to show off fight moves and archery. There is no redeeming quality here. It just sucks. The action scenes are incredibly short, all done in weird shaky cam, and looks like rehearsal footage.

So what about the 8.1 rating? What about the people who love it, or at least loved the first couple of seasons? The quality of the show never really changes: it was bad from the start. People (over the age of eleven) who say they liked the first and second seasons must be joking. An adult that is into a show like this would be too much for my feeble mind. The sadness, the sadness... Just go the message boards and witness the thoughts of the fans – you will thank me for it.

If you have ANY sense of quality, you will hate this show. This show is so overrated that I feel like screaming. Arrow is a clear three (maybe four) out of ten. I cannot overstate this: stay away from this garbage. Instead, try watching Daredevil on Netflix. You will thank me.

This show has seen a lot of love and hate already. I watched the two first episodes and decided to write a review based solely on those. The reason that I find myself qualified for writing a review this early is that I already know what the rest of the show will be like. It will be bad.

I must sadly say that I didn't like this show, either. But my reasons for it isn't about race-swap or masculinist philosophy. I didn't think the premise was stupid (come on, all the other shows are stupid too), or that they have switched the race of a certain young man (come on, race doesn't matter here), or that it was feminist propaganda (come on, women are allowed in this superhero nerd club), or that it was somehow offending Smallville (come on, Smallville sucked). I didn't like it because it is a terrible show. It is much worse than the Flash, worse than Gotham, worse than Arrow, worse than Constantine, and even worse than Smallville and Lois and Clark. It is the worst show ever to come out of a DC comic – ever. And that is to say a lot.

The cast and acting performances are reason enough to let the show pass you by. Supergirl is played by an actress that is a really bad fit for a power role. The role of Kara is presented like a bland girl that smells like teen spirit on Nickolodeon. She looks 15 and always has a flustered look on her face (which is caused by bad direction and acting, not her actual facial expression). This makes it seem like a big girl in a big world thing, in which she must buy shoes and find love, all while becoming a superhero. It is all pink and fluffy, all about finding the fifty shades of grey... She somehow works as an assistant or secretary for a newspaper, but it comes off as if she works for a fashion magazine. Her boss is just Ally McBeal: nothing good there. The hateful boss theme is awful and pulls the show down in a very vaginized way. Oh, and there's JAMES, the black, hot Jimmy Olsen... What is that about? Why is Jimmy Olsen a black underwear model type that Kara hopes to get a pity date from? And of course he is meant to be the romantic interest of Supergirl, which is completely ridiculous. There is no chemistry between any of the actors, even the important relations seem bland and artificial. There is nothing to enjoy about the characters or acting. This also means: there is terrible direction at work.

And when dealing with a show that features plenty of supernatural action, we need convincing special effects and nice action scenes. But the computer effects are terrible, I mean really, really bad. It looks so incredibly fake and cheap when Supergirl flies and does supernatural stuff. They obviously haven't had the budget that they wanted, and decided to go ahead and try to pull off major scenes anyway. This ruins the whole thing for me. The computerized effects on the Flash are just so much better, for example, and they aren't great, either. Supergirl can't fight at all and when she does, it looks fake and cheap, again ruined by bad CGI.

The worst part of Supergirl is that it seems anti-feminist to me. There is no trace of a strong woman on the show. Much of it lies in the way Supergirl is portrayed in relation to Superman. Kara didn't become a Superhero because Clark became a good one, so she decided to just hide her powers and live like she had none. Until one day, she saves her sister and then wants to be a hero. But what is up with that? How come she was too weak to use her powers for good? Wasn't there any crime that motivated her? She is generally presented as an inferior superman, inferior because she is female, inferior because she is too feminine and cutesy, scared and weak. Her entire way of behaving as both Supergirl and Kara stinks of weakness and cowardice. Even when she fights, she looks scared and cries about being hit. It seems as if they really want to present us with a feminine superhero that is much weaker than any counterparts on other shows of the same type. They had no interest in giving us a strong female in the lead. They wanted to give us a little girl, all scared and puny.

I hated the show for the above reasons in particular. I am not saying that you should hate it, too. I am saying that I, myself, hated it. I feel sorry for the men that hates the show because they see some kind of feminism in the show. There is no trace of a strong woman on it. The men that hates the show for that reason, will not be happy until Supergirl becomes Superboy. And I think that is pathetic to wish for. Supergirl had potential, all ruined by terrible writing, directing and acting. Of course, I also feel sorry for the people who enjoy the show, because they deserve so much better.

I have no doubt in my mind that this show will be cancelled by the end of the first season. See it while t lasts. Or don't. Either way, you won't remember it in a year.

I would advise my fellow action fans to watch this. I gave this movie 8 out of 10. While the plot and characters honestly felt slightly lame, the action and fast paced editing carries the movie to a higher level. There is no possible world in which this movie isn't entertaining as hell. Any viewer who enjoy impressive stunt-work will be engaged from start to finish.

Some of the scenes involving parkour and martial arts were quite impressive. The opening sequence involving Leito's thrilling free running adventure was probably one of the most well executed action scenes in history. Seriously! The music and stunts work so well together that I instantly wanted to re-watch that scene. The very way it was put together was so splendid. And several other action scenes were quite worth the watch, albeit not as impressive as the opening action sequence. In short: watch it for that scene, at least. The cinematography is quite spectacular and delicious throughout, the soundtrack fresh, the actors comfortable with their clichés.

Sure, one could find reasons to hate it; the plot is lame; the characters are pretty flat; the villain is a little sleazy and evil-for-the-sake-of-evil; the plot with the bomb and girl on top of the building was dumb. Those are usually big problems in most movies – but in this one it can be forgiven. The action is too impressive, simply. The editing is so sharp and on-point that I can't put a finger on it. It is dynamic, sleek and intense.

I was positively surprised! I am glad to see a good European action movie that seriously tops anything America can deliver. I would encourage you to watch this!

I will advise fellow horror fanatics to see this one. I liked this movie and found it to be very unsettling at times. It actually managed to scare me quite intensely at times. We all know the drill: under the covers, in the closet, under the bed; but there's something about the first two thirds of this one that brought it to a new level. That is, until we enter the last third of the movie which really kind of sucked.

I found the first Insidious to be above average, while I deemed the second installment to be relatively average. This third chapter is actually on a par with the first one, maybe even better. Even though prequels usually have a tendency to be much worse than the movies they build up to, this one is different. The new director has taken the working elements of the Wan-movies (a traditional but well working story, scary music and mood, quality acting and very scary everyday locations) and made them come together in a way that made me compare it in quality to The Conjuring. And that's a good thing. The trademarks are all there in a form that worked better than in Annabelle, for example. The story is new and even though it tries too hard to tie into the first Insidious, it gets away with most of it.

If it wasn't for a couple of terrible decisions in the end I would have enjoyed the movie more. The first bits of the movie had me on the edge of my seat while the last had me laughing out loud. I don't know if that ever happened before in such a high level production. I was stunned at how fast the whole thing deflated and turned into something much less scary.

Overall, I rate it a six or seven out of ten. I can only rate it tentatively for now. Enjoy!

The reviews that praise this movie are certainly deceitful. I do not know if these people deemed it good because they did not see the first two; I do not know if they have some hidden agenda; or maybe they just enjoyed it. I won't spend time offending people. But something is very wrong with the positive nature of the reviews out there. The other, overly negative, reviews that bashes it and gives it a 1 are also off. The movie isn't that bad. But it doesn't deserve the name that belongs to a franchise that once was good, when it was in the hands of James Cameron.

Terminator Genisys is not a 1 out of 10, but it is definitely not a 10 either. It is arguably below average both deemed as a stand-alone project and as a sequel to Terminator (1984) and Terminator 2 (1991). I judge Genisys to be slightly better than the shameful Terminator 3, kind of the same quality as Salvation. It is definitely not a true installment in the Terminator legacy.

For what it's worth, I really tried to like it. I had actually been looking forward to it. I'm disappointed because it was a waste of money – just like the remake of Robocop. I feel somebody is laughing at me in some expensive Hollywood office right now.

And why do I feel that? It offends people by its very form and content. We are in for a typical modern take on a teen movie: superficial; packed wall to wall with CGI action with no blood; less than great acting; a bad plot that makes no sense on a theoretical level; attempts to spoil previous movies of the franchise; constant references to previous lines in previous movies that are delivered in a way that makes it all feel stupid; plot twists that makes no sense and spoils the fun; etc. etc. It was like someone had actively sought to make a mediocre movie that could not be seen as a real sequel. I cannot understand why Cameron would say that people wanted to see this as a true sequel. It really isn't.

Terminator promises story and action. Both are massive failures. The story is a mess. It makes no sense and is not interesting, more disengaging. It is not that it is confusing but more that it is annoying. And the action hasn't been done properly. Even compared to the original from the 80's the action looks very fake, all shiny/soapy and CGI heavy. I loved the special effects of Terminator 2; and it is now, 25 years later, still better than the effects in Genisys.

The casting wasn't great either. I absolutely hated the girl playing Sarah Connor. She had nothing of the personality that we saw in the first two movies. The new John Connor looked wrong for the part. The new T1000 is cast well but doesn't get a good scene. The people looking forward to seeing T1000 will be very disappointed. Skynet has obviously decided to send a much less efficient version this time. Not only does it pass out by being shot in the head now, but it is now possible to defeat it easily. I don't think the person who wrote that part had actually seen the second Terminator film. I sort of liked Kyle Reese in it; and Arnold couldn't have been replaced, of course. But the people looking forward to seeing 1984-terminator again will be disappointed. It is just bad CGI.

I really didn't like it. I expect the ratings to dive systematically over the next three years, so this one will land on a 5. That is one above my grade. I rate it a 4. But I am also a fan of the first two. So this has greatly influenced my grade. People who just love Schwarzenegger will of course love this one.

In my opinion, this movie is both a waste of time and money. It is not completely amateur like many other newer horror releases, but is hardly worth watching. If you are a gore fanatic you might enjoy parts of it, though. The effects aren't as bad as they could be. But let's be honest: This one also barely places itself above amateur level. The casting and acting is really bad; the direction is campy. The worst part is that the creators obviously thinks the movie to be clever or original, while it really offends the viewer by repeating something that has been done so much better so many times before. And another thing: some "brain" at the production company decided that it should be pushed as something similar to Rosemary's Baby. Just saying it feels icky. This movie is so many leagues below Rosemary's Baby that it hurts my eyes just seeing the unjust comparisons. One could more easily compare it to Would Your Rather? – another dreadful movie. So there... Not worth your time unless you are really bored, and rich enough to buy bad movies that you'll see once.

I was really looking forward to this one. Sadly, I was disappointed. It is not very engaging at all. Right from the beginning the tone and narration comes off as silly and childish. It instantly builds the atmosphere that one could expect from a novel written for teenage girls. It is so bland: a young girl who is a bored nobody suddenly gets a chance to go on a thrilling adventure, and even to be a genuine princess in a beautiful and strange place. Of course, there is a knight in sci-fi armor, and gravity boots, heroics and the likes.

Jupiter Ascending is kind of like a splice between Divergent and countless other fantasy franchises that also appeals to women, as well as men who thinks that all movies are good. But the appeal is clearly directed at young girls. Tatum is made to look elf-ish with has pointy ears and light beard, but in all other respects he IS the guy from Divergent. The female lead IS the girl from Divergent, the Catniss Everdeen of this horrible and sleazy setup. The worst part of it is that it comes from the sibling-directors that once defined a genre by giving us The Matrix.

So the story sucks. But what about the execution? There are no points to award for that, either. The casting is awful; they have chosen very blank and uninteresting actors that fill their roles without trying. Kunis and Tatum seem like they are hung over at times. The young actors that play the sinister family are especially terrible. Normally, the Wachowskis have the action part down. But this time it is silly. The action scenes are over the top and visually confusing. It even feels a bit Disney, at times. I have to say that the CGI looks good, and that it is clearly made on a high budget. The sounds and sights at times alludes slightly to The Matrix, and therefore I did actually like some of it.

But I have to be honest. It really didn't appeal to me. I will advise you to stay away from this release if you did not enjoy Divergent. But if you enjoyed Divergent, it may give you just what you need. Whatever floats your boat.

The average horror viewer should stay away from Seed. This is one of those low budget movies that has a stupid plot, bad acting and looks and feels cheap all the way through. The only thing that it does well is taking your money and placing it firmly into the pocket of a greedy little man named Uwe Boll. The movie would have scored a 1 out of 10 by the looks of out alone...

With that said, the movie does have a little shock value, and an important part of it is borrowed from real life. Boll definitely crosses the line with putting PETA material in here without warning the viewer properly. I would have liked to know that I had to cringe over lengthy REAL LIFE SNUFF FOOTAGE of animals being tortured and killed before a minute had passed. The movie lingers on it and savors every moment. If you dislike watching animal abuse, then I would seriously advise you to stay away from this movie. These clips would be okay – in my book – only if the dear Mr. Boll actually tried to make some form of social comment about it. And even then I wouldn't have been able to watch it. Those clips was from real life, guys... Horror movies are watched for entertainment, and no movie should attempt to feature real life animal abuse as a source of it. I want fiction, not real life snuff! And this comes from a guy that actually liked A Serbian Film. Well, enough about that.

The poor taste of Mr. Boll actually had little to do with the grade I give this amateur piece of excrement! If I wanted animal snuff I would go to the butcher! If I wanted a good or scary movie I would stay away from Uwe Boll.

I must sadly warn my fellow horror/thriller fans to keep away from this release. If you are looking for a good and scary time filled with suspense you will be disappointed. It is actually impossible to even accept the basic setup for several reasons. While the cinematography is arguably one notch over a passable High School project, everything else pulls the movie down into an amateur ditch – it sinks even lower than many of the other unfortunate horror-releases of newer time. The direction is awful and the acting is really quite terrible. The script problems are obvious and nothing has been done to attempt to fix cringe-worthy plot holes. It really makes no sense. The movie is also full of hand-me-down elements from many previous horror movies, and it does a remarkably terrible job copying them. Something Wicked boils down to an unengaging experience due to the general poor quality, and it is not worth neither time nor money. It is particularly sad to see the last rolls of film of the late Brittany Murphy, which, without a doubt, was the only reason that this was ever released. Murphy looks tired, strung out – and it can be argued that it is in poor taste to publish this unfinished and confused nonsense in her wake. I think this movie is cursed. If this is the case it may be a good horror movie after all. But it is still a three... Stay clear of this release, friends!

I am sad to have to advise my fellow horror nerds to stay clear of The Culling. This is another horrid low-budget attempt at making a generic horror film of very poor quality on many levels. It is actually quite cringe-worthy. The Culling primarily looks remarkably cheap and suffers from amateur cinematography at its worst; it really does look like a High School project due for a C-, and this is if the teacher was very, very kind. The acting and the behaviour of the characters reveal the awful writing and the cheesy/terrible directing from Rustam Branaman. The plot-setup isn't worth much either; it has been seen countless times: a group of friends go for a drive, then they have to stop at a remote location, etc. The plot is just taken from other horror movies and is completely uninspired and bland. And the execution actually tested my patience. The Culling drives each and every stereotypical character home like it was created to fit the generic pattern from the 70's: the Christian, non-alcoholic virgin is the good one, the marijuana smoker is somehow violent and obnoxious, the pushy drinker-boyfriend tries to pressure the good virgin to stray from her obvious Christian path, and her unchaste friend is just messed up. The whole problem with this particular generic type of friend-group isn't the fact that it is too basic, but that it hasn't got the actors who can act the parts in a convincing manner. Stay clear!