krycek19 Reviews

Bone Tomahawk (2015)

Bored tomahawk

[1/10 · 18 August 2016]

This is basically The Hills Have Eyes meeting a very boring western.

The trailer had such promise and I'm a huge Kurt Russel fan, but what a drag.

Aside from the opening scene and the last part of the movie, nothing happens. They just talk a lot. In the town, around campfires. And then they talk some more.

Nice cinematography and professionally directed and well acted. And the gore is pretty gross and convincing if you're into that stuff.

Funny about the gore, how it's completely bloodless whenever someone is shot. Weird contrast.

Other than that, it's pretty pointless and way too long for its own good.

Don't bother with this.

Sinset Boulevard (1987 Video)

Great porn flick

[27 July 2016]

A failed porn flick writer Demond (Mike Horner) tries to sell his latest script to the president of a pornflick company Miss James (Shanna Mccullough). She won't buy his script, but offers him sex right there in her office. They screw, on her desk (one of the best porn scenes ever made) and she gives him a job afterwards as a delivery man of porn flicks on VHS.

The first house he delivers to is the home of Nora Desmond (Rachel Ryan) a former pornstar and another former male pornstar Maxwell Nottingham (John Leslie) She invites Demond into her house to watch the tapes with her. Then they reveal while they're still young as they were pornstars a long time ago. An orgasm every night at midnight freezes the aging process. So the two former pornstars stay young by screwing. Demond moves into the house and he is soon asked to take over the screwing from Maxwell as he is losing his touch. And Demond too can then be young forever.

This is awesome filthy dirty porn the way it was shot in the eighties, where the female stars always screwed in high heels and a musical score played every time a couple was screwing. There was no kissing on the lips. And every movie was shot with the most crappy camcorder, even for that time. And foreplay and screwing was over in less than 15 minutes.

With two of the hottest pornstars of it's time. Shanna Mccullough and Rachel Ryan.

I can recommend this to anyone who grew up with eighties porn and misses it. I enjoy 21st century porn as well. The female pornstars look better and the screwing is better in a lot of ways. But I always find myself jerking off to 80'ies porn more often than modern porn.

And Sinset Boulevard is a perfect example of that vintage porn.

Squirm (1976)

The worms are just spaghetti in tomato sauce

[1/10 · 10 July 2016]

And that about sums up how bad this 40 year old movie really is. It starts out OK with these nasty Southerners living in a small rural town in Georgia. It has that horror-feel to it, but then it just becomes really bad.

Mick from New York, who is visiting his sad looking girlfriend Geri, finds a skeleton and try to tell the sheriff. But the moronic hill billy sheriff sees him as a big city troublemaker and instead of doing his job he keeps threatening to throw Mick in prison. Without ever doing it. When this joke of a sheriff and his girlfriend are eaten by worms, they get what they deserve.

This movies biggest problem is not the extremely bad effects and that these ordinary size worms growl like lions when they attack and eat people (ridicoulus) it's that there isn't a single likable character in the movie. And it takes about 50 minutes before we see the first worm attack. And even by that time the movie remains boring for the remaining 40 minutes.

As far as the whole town apparently has been eaten by the worms, the budget was early too small to actually show it. Which makes the ending when the power comes back on all the less believable. As far as gore goes, it's also really badly made.

Don't believe the hype. This is bad. Really bad.

Supernatural: Girls, Girls, Girls (2014) Season 10, Episode 7

Super hero fight??

[9/10 · 24 June 2016]

I love this episode. Classic Supernatural.

But the fight between Dean and Cole is ridiculous, even for this show. In another episode Dean can't get a locked door open by jumping up against it. But here he can throw Cole through the windshield of a car, like it's nothing. First of all it requires enormous strength to throw a grown man through a car-windshield. I doubt, even the strongest man in the world could do this. Second of all, Cole gets right back up and fight Dean again. He would have been knocked out, maybe even break his spine. And thirdly: if Dean don't wanna kill Cole, it seems strange that he throws him through a windshield. I'm pretty sure it would kill a man in real life.

Deadpool (2016)

Finally an R-rated comicbook movie and they make it this lame

[1/10 · 22 May 2016]

I was really looking forward to Deadpool as I'm a Ryan Reynolds fan and it's rated R.

However the humor is toilet humor. It's about farts, jerking off and comments about actors, including Reynolds himself and other movies.

The plot is that Wade Wilson gets terminal cancer and in order to save his life he agrees to undergo an experiment that will give him the power to heal. However Ajax, the man that turn people into mutants and sometimes just kill them, can't be trusted. And Ajax, who is the villain is played by the awful Ed Skrein from the awful reboot of Transporter. Ajax tortures Wade and the lab explodes (I can't remember why) and Wade has become scarred and takes the new identity as Deadpool. He starts to kill a lot of people looking for Ajax. But even though the movie is rated R, some scenes where he tortures badguys are actually not shown. Ajax in a desperate attempt to stop Wade kidnaps Wades boney girlfriend and Wade has to get help from the two most annoying X-men characters I have ever seen. Some lesbian looking teenage girl with a shaved head and a cgi-Russian guy made out of metal.

The violence is awesome and a welcome change from the bloodless Marvel violence. However all the violence can be seen in the red band trailer and the rest is crap. So if you've seen the trailer, I recommend not watching the movie as you will be really disappointed.

Bringing X-men into the movie is annoying as hell as I've always hated the X-men. And Wade talking to the camera gets really annoying after a while.

On top of that the action itself is disappointing as this is clearly a low budget movie.

Avoid this and watch the first Kickass movie (not the second one!!!) if you like violent superhero movies.

The Shrine (2010)

Garbage and an insult to all of Poland

[1/10 · 13 May 2016]

Polish people are not living in medieval times. Contrary to what stupid bigot Americans, that has never been outside America, much less in Europe might think, polish people are just as modern as the rest of us. Al though not as stupid as Americans who believe something like this actually takes place in real life.

The lead is an incredibly stupid woman who gets what she deserves at the end of the movie.

Do not watch this, unless you're a stupid retarded American. To us Europeans and people with a normal intelligence it's sheer torture to sit through this crap.

Do not believe the crap either, where people are comparing this to Hostel. Hostel is a lot better and has a good story, good acting, real suspense and horror. Everything this load of crap lacks!!!

The Jungle Book (2016)

Disney doing terrible remake of one of their own cartoons based on a classic novel

[1/10 · 12 May 2016]

Not that I consider the original cartoon a classic. And I've never read Rudyard Kiplings novel. But this crap is far worse than the cartoon.

First of all, the cgi in a movie relying this much on cgi needs to be state of the art. But in fact its almost as horrible as Spawn and The Scorpion King. Everything from the animals to the jungle is cgi. The snake and the tiger are the only ones that look like real animals. Making Louie, the monkey king act and sound like a mob-boss and look like Christopher Walken who is the voice, is a little funny, but not enough to make me any less bored at that point in the movie. As for the rest of the animals, if you're doing a feature version of a cartoon with talking animals, you better have that talent and the money to make it look good. They had neither here. The wolves are the worst cgi animated animals I have ever seen. After last years Jurassic World, its hard to believe they can get it this bad. The scene where the water puts out the fire in the jungle looks more fake than the water in The day after tomorrow. A 12 year old movie.

The plot itself (I don't know how close this is to the novel) steals from a lot of other movies. And it does so shamelessly and bad. From The Lion King to Ice Age, there is nothing original here. The movie also doesn't know if it once to be a serious interpretation of the novel or a kiddie-friendly version. So it fails as both versions.

And hearing the law of the jungle or whatever the damn thing was said out loud 3 times during the movie was 3 times too many.

The kid playing Mowgli is annoyingly cute, annoyingly clean and way way too human for a boy that was raised by animals. I found myself being really annoyed in a scene where Mowgli sits on the bears stomach as it floats on a river. The bear splashes water at Mowgli but his hair never gets wet. Again, this was complete cgi and the fact that I noticed this, shows how bad that scene and the whole movie was. Had I been excited and given a rats ass about any of the characters, I probably wouldn't have noticed it.

If they had had a bigger budget and made the animals real (which means they can't talk and they hunt, kill and eat each other) and they had made Mowgli a wild boy with no language, acting like an animal and made it R-rated for adults, then MAYBE they could have made a decent movie.

The worst part of it all is that Jon Favreau, who gave us the original first and excellent Iron Man movie actually directed this crap.

Avoid it. Even if you have kids around the age, this movie is meant for. They will find it even more boring than most of the adult audience already finds it. Let them watch the cartoon instead. At least it was fun to watch for me when I was a kid.

Once again, I wish IMDb, would allow the possibility of zero stars. Or in the case of this movie stars below zero would be even more fitting.

The Shining (1997)

Horrible TV-crap!!

[1/10 · 7 May 2016]

It is closer to the book than Kubricks masterpiece. Not counting the over sentimental added ending, that was completely unnecessary.

But this is horrible. From the low budget, to the terrible acting to the censorship of TV, that doesn't allow for any f-words or any graphic violence.

Steven Webber is no Jack Nicholson. But he does a decent job as the only one in the small cast. But he's still just a TV-actor confined to TV-censor-ship.

Everyone else is just terrible. The kid playing Danny and the guy playing Hallorann are the worst. Because compared to fantastic Danny Lloyd and Scatman Crothers in the feature film, they are terrible. They are the ones with the ability to shine and they need to be powerful characters. In this TV-crap Danny is an annoying brat with way to many lines and Hallorann is just a pathetic old man.

Rebecca De Mornay does her best, but she never seems truly scared like Shelly Duvall in the feature film.

5 and a half hours is how long the miniseries last. And until Danny finally enters room 217 and find the lady in the bathtub it drags on and on with nothing happening.

This is especially a problem with The Torrances making several trips to Sidewinder and meet people there. This ruins the sense of isolation and being alone in the hotel. Because they can leave anytime they want to until the snow comes.

And explaining everything in detail to us very apparently dumb viewers doesn't help either.

The special effects are horrible. From the crappy looking cgi hedge animals, to the model of a snow-cat, to the hotel blowing up in the end, it all looks terrible.

The ghosts of the hotel, apart from the well made rotting lady in room 217, looks like ordinary people wearing Halloween makeup to look like ghosts.

The hotel itself seems too small, compared to the one in the feature film to ever be scary. In the feature film the enormous hotel itself, is a character. Here it's just a ordinary looking hotel that looks mostly like it's shot on sound-stages, which makes it that less believable.

I don't even think a graphic profanity filled version with a big budget on a pay per view channel could have made this any better. No matter what it would have still paled to Kubricks version.

The hotel in the feature film seemed very real and very scary.

I think Stephen King should have pulled his head out his ass and considered it an honor that Stanley Kubrick took his mediocre novel, not suitable for a movie adaptation at all, and turned it in to one of the best horror movies ever out of it. And that one of the greatest actors of that time Jack Nicholson played the lead.

I can only agree with King on one thing here. In Kubricks version Jack Torrance got mad too fast. But there was not enough time to show his decent into madness. As far as the alcoholism goes it is also shown in Kubricks version, but in a much better way.

Everything is just better in Kubricks version.

I can only warn people not to watch this.

Mission: Impossible - Rogue Nation (2015)

Everything Bond should be.

[10/10 · 7 May 2016]

Daniel Craig has taken the fun out of Bond. Gone is Pierce Brosnan, the humor, the babes, the exotic locations, the villains trying to destroy or take over the whole planet. Even the action sucks.

Enter the M.I. franchise, in particular the 5th movie and you have the perfect spy movie with lots of thrilling breath-taking real action scenes with real stunts done on location, real practical effects, babes, exotic locations, humor, energy, great characters, great stories and an energy and a fun thrill ride you won't find in the crappy awful Bond and Bourne franchises. Or in the even worse over bloated CGI and oh so serious and oh so boring superhero movies.

The reason: Tom Cruise: this guy loves acting, he loves movies and he loves making movies. The M.I. franchise is his baby and he cares what the audience wants. He still has the energy like when he was 25. And that shines through in his performance and it makes the other actors give themselves as much to the movie as he does.

That is particularly obvious with the hot new Swedish actress in Hollywood: Rebecca Ferguson. Not only does she have a great body as well as being beautiful, but she can also kick ass and do her own stunts as good as Tom Cruise.

I hope her character Ilsa Faust will be a new addition to Ethan Hunts team in future M.I. movies.

Daniel Craig, could learn something here. All he can do is bitch and moan about being Bond and he delivers the worst Bond ever. Thanks for nothing you ugly blond brite with pointy ears and a face like a 70 year old.

If you're fed up with superheroes and horrible PG13-remakes of R-rated classics and you miss those days, when they made old school action movies, that didn't have to be depressing and/or realistic, but just fun, this movie and this franchise is for you.

Dick Tracy (1990)

How could this movie win any awards that wasn't Razzies?

[1/10 · 26 April 2016]

The most embarrassing part of the film is Warren Beatty (53 years old!!!) at the time casting himself as Dick Tracy, a part that should have been played by an actor 20 years younger than him. Due to Botox and plastic surgery he has as little facial movement as the actors wearing heavy makeup or masks to look like comic book characters. And he can't act either, which is possibly because there is no-one to direct him. And despite how great looking he think he is, he looks old and tired. All the great actors in this movie (not counting the very old douche-bag Warren Beatty) are completely wasted here, because they're unrecognizable in their heavy makeup or masks.

Apart from a funny Al Pacino) as the main villain "Big Boy.

And Dustin Hoffmann as Mumbles, that I didn't recognize until his second scene and in a closeup.

Madonna is very sexy as Breathless Mahoney, but they would get better acting out of a chimp than her.

As for the movie in general: the matte paintings and the stupid colors on the fake looking buildings that is suppose to look like a comic book city are not impressive. Especially not, thinking about Sin City, where this was done on a computer. And looked a 1000 times better. I know this movie was made 26 years ago, but it must have looked like crap even then.

And what's the deal with making all the badguys look like comic book characters and only 5 actors in the movie looking like human beings? Either they all look like comic book characters or they all look like human beings.

The movie is slow in pace and drags along and could easily have been half an hour shorter.

There is zero chemistry between Warren Beatty and Madonna and Warren Beatty and Glenne Headly. Probably due to the old Beatty, playing opposite women that could be his daughters and Beattys inability to direct other actors.

The kid playing Kid is okay.

Overall a dull movie and the worst comicbook adaptation I have ever seen.

Avoid this crap!!

The Transporter Refueled (2015)

Dumb freaking' movie

[1/10 · 24 April 2016]

This movie comes in second as one of the dumbest movies I've seen in the last year. The first one is the terrible remake of Point Break.

Apparently Ed Skrein was on Game of thrones. I don't remember him on that amazing show so he must have been terrible. Either way he's no Jason Statham and based on his terrible wooden performance in this unnecessary garbage of a remake, he will hopefully remain a nobody.

I have nothing nice to say about this crap.

Frank Martin was a smart operator and highly intelligent when he was played by Statham. Skreins version acts retarded. Neither him, nor his father, with the same name, (what a dumb idea) ever seem to even care, no matter what happens to them.

The movie drags on and on and the actionscenes are lame and seen a 100 times before. How many times do we have to watch the hero being chased by the local police though narrow streets in some European city? How many times do we have to believe that not only do the local police drive crappy little cars, but they're also complete inept drivers who crashes their cars first chance they get.

And the father is kidnapped twice, because I guess the writers ran out of ideas.

And don't even get me started on the product placement. Pretty much every scene either shows brands of alcohol, cars or smartphones and it's not enough to mention a certain vodka, no it has to be praised too in the scene. It made me really angry.

On top of that this movie takes place in 2010. The leads all have iphone 5 or 5s. These models didn't even exist in 2010.

That just shows you how retarded this pile of crap really is.

It still amazes me when movies like this get greenlighted with as inept actors as Ed Skrein to replace as good an actor as Jason Statham. And yes Statham is a good actor. Watch the movie Hummingbird, if you don't believe me.

Avoid this. Even if you're paid to see it. Avoid it. Watch the original three with Statham instead. The third one is terrible but practically a Shakespeare play, compared to this piece of crap.

Taken 3 (2014)

Surprisingly good.

[7/10 · 23 April 2016]

And I really hate the sequel. So let me explain why I'm giving the final chapter 7 stars.

The first Taken was genius. It was violent and gritty and exciting and didn't feel like a PG13 movie.

Then came the obvious money-grabbing sequel, which was terrible. Ridiculous plot and shaky cam witch ruined the action-scenes.

I was never gonna see this as it is the same guy that directed the sequel. But then I found a site I could stream it from and I figured what the hell.

And I was really surprised. Sure it has flaws in the plot and the acting is terrible from the otherwise hot and usually great Maggie Grace. But it's a great action-movie. The shaky cam is almost gone and the action scenes are really well done. And the plot of who killed Lenore was interesting enough to make me watch the movie to the end without ever being bored.

Forest Whitaker is miscast and plays once again the dumb cop-leader who is always one step behind the hero. Basically he plays the exact same character as he did in The Last Stand. Here he is just even more stupid.

Giving Bryans buddies from their bodyguard company something to do for a change is nice.

The cinematography is nice as well as the musical score. It seems like the director really wanted to make up for the horrible second movie. And bring back some of the stuff that worked so well in the original, And he did.

For a PG13 movie this feels like an R-rated movie. It has plenty of bloodshed and the f-word is said many times. Nice to see that in a PG13 movie that usually don't allow blood or the f-word. But it gives the movie more edge. And bloodshed when people are shot is just more satisfying to look at.

And the fact that this takes place only in the US and not in Europe is a nice change as well.

I can definitely recommend this movie.

House at the End of the Street (2012)

Lawrence's hot body is the only good thing here

[1/10 · 21 April 2016]

Another watered down PG13 predictable, boring horror-wannabe movie.

**SPOILERS AHEAD** Elissa (Is that a name?) moves to a small town with her mother.

Next door lives Ryan, a weird young man who saw his sister kill his parents and then his sister killed herself. Then he inherited the house and lives there alone. But wait, there is a twist. Because in Ryans basement a girl is locked up. She is Ryans sister that didn't kill herself after all. But is she' really Ryans sister?

*MORE SPOILERS. DO NOT READ AHEAD IF YOU PLAN TO SEE THE MOVIE *

The answer is no. There never was a sister. Ryans mother was abusive and forced Ryan to dress like a girl and called him Carrie-Anne. Finally the boy snapped and killed his mother and father. And afterwards he created the sister in his mind, to forget that he was the one that killed his parents. And the girl in the basement that he wants to be his sister is someone Ryan kidnapped and put blue contactlenses in her eyes. For reasons unknown.

A rip-off from Psycho and several other movies, but done badly. Because of a bad script and inept directing.

The wooden acting from everyone including Jennifer Lawrence and the plot-turns coming down the road a mile away, makes this another forgettable mediocre horror film that never delivers even one scare. No blood, because this is PG13.

On top of that every teenager in the movie, including Ryan is good-looking. And so is Larences mother and the few other parents we see in the movie. Yet another cliché that Hollywood needs to get over. I'd rather see ugly people acting good than pretty people acting bad.

I only kept watching because Lawrence has a hot body and she is either wet or sweating, filmed from angles that shows her nice boobs and ass.

But I'd rather watch porn any day than this dribbling crap.

All this movie did was making me horny looking at Lawrence.

And that is not a compliment to the movie.

Tron (1982)

The sequel is much better

[1/10 · 14 April 2016]

I have no idea how this is considered a classic. Even in 1982 the effects were very, very bad. The acting is pretty bad as well, the music is annoying and the movie in general is boring.

The only two good things are that this is a short movie and it spawned an amazing sequel.

The only ones who would have liked this were programmers back then.

This movie has so little plot that, watching the much better sequel can be done easily.

And the sequel is the only good thing that came out of this crap.

Avoid the original.

Dream House (2011)

So Daniel Craig can act

[2/10 · 31 March 2016]

I hate Craig's Bond and in general, he's always been a bad actor in my opinion. But he was good in Dream House.

DO NOT READ FURTHER IF YOU HAVEN'T SEEN THE MOVIE!!

The twist is that Craigs character Will is really Peter Ward, whose family was shot by mistake. And in order to protect himself he has created Will and a fantasy world where his family is alive and well. But at the same time his wife and two daughters are more than just figments of his imagination. They are actual ghosts.

The truth is that the neighbor hired a man to kill his wife because he thought she was cheating on him. And the man he hired went into the wrong house and killed Peters wife and kids instead.

Ever since then Peter has been committed to a mental institution, thinking he killed his own family. But eventually he he is released for lack of evidence. Peter then goes back to the house and slowly finds his way back to reality.

It all ends with the neighbor trying to kill his own wife and Peter. But he and the man he hired ends up dead, shot and burned to death in that order.

Next time we see Peter he's normal again and has written a book about what happened that has become a nr. 1 bestseller. How he was able to proof his innocence when the guilty men died makes no sense. Maybe if the movie had another ending or it had been 15 minutes longer it could have been explained better.

It was an interesting movie but it suffered from a bad ending and to many things left unexplained.

Ex Machina (2014)

Artmovie disguised as sci-fi

[2/10 · 27 March 2016]

This movie is more an art movie than it is sci-fi.

Had it been sci-fi/horror as the trailer indicates, it might have been interesting. But it's mostly boring. Al though it kept me curious enough to watch it until the end, it never really delivered.

There are several plot holes in the movie. The main one is Nathan, the founder of the fictional Microsoft like company "Bluebook".

Why would a man as rich as he is, isolate himself completely from the rest of the world, just to work on his robots, when he is clearly lonely? Why is he not living in a big city and partying and getting laid with women that wanna marry him, because of his wealth? Why would Caleb agree to meet him and spend a week at his research facility, no questions asked? Why is there no service on Calebs smart-phone? A man like Nathan would wanna be online 24/7 as he is as he chose Caleb, who did not win any lottery at the Bluebook company.

Why would Nathan not have build his robots, so he could shut them down without having to go any wear near them, in case they get out of control? Why would Nathan have build robots that can trigger power failure when they recharge their batteries without Nathan knowing about this? Why would Caleb stay in a facility with no windows alone with another man that he doesn't even know? How can Caleb fall in love with a robot in less than a week? Even if she is based on his pornography profile? (what the hell is that? I googled it and there is no such thing) As attractive and intelligent as the robot Ava, appears, she is still just a machine. And that a man as intelligent as Caleb, can be manipulated by a robot is ridiculous.

And in my opinion Nathan is not evil. He might be torturing his robots that are all female and have sex with them and eventually shut them down. But they're not living creatures. They're machines that he created. And he has the right to do whatever he wants to with his own creations.

Then there is Ava's body with and without skin on it. Without skin, she has a big butt and big breasts. But as soon as she has put skin on her body both her butt and breasts has been reduced in size. This is of course due to Alicia Wikanders sad petite body. But why make the body without skin so attractive, when the body with skin is so sad?? They should have cast a more attractive actress with a curvy body, like Scarlett Johansson. That would have made sense.

And as far as Ava's, face and scull goes, it's not even an original design. In the original 1987 Robocop movie, Robocops face and scull, look almost exactly the same as Ava's.

READ NO FURTHER IF YOU PLAN TO SEE THE MOVIE!! As far as the ending goes, it didn't make much sense. Ava and another robot kills Nathan and Ava escapes, leaving Caleb locked inside the facility. Nathan wouldn't have made his robots so intelligent that they could manipulate humans or be strong enough to kill humans or control the power. The helicopter pilot that flew Nathan to the facility would have questioned Ava showing up at the end of the week instead of Caleb. He would have called Nathan to verify whatever lie Ava told him to get on the helicopter.

I could go on and on with the major plot holes of this movie.

I can only say, if you expect a sci-fi horror movie, you will get neither. The only interesting part of the movie is the special effects that are impressive, but not stunning once you know how they did it.

With a bigger budget and a different ending, this could have been a much better movie.

Saw 3D (2010)

Disgusting, confusing sh*tty movie

[1/10 · 22 March 2016]

Not only is the gore disgusting and completely over the top (and not in a fun way like the Evil Dead series) Its just people being torn apart in the most grotesque disgusting ways simply for the sake of showing it. And when I wasn't disgusted I laughed because it looked so fake several times. And I do not have a problem with violence in movies at all. But there is a line and they just keep crossing it in every sick disgusting Saw sequel they have made.

But the worst part is that the gore seems more important than what little actual plot there is in this garbage of a movie. Not that there is much of a plot. And it's so confusing that it makes no sense what so ever.

The original Saw movie might have been clever with good acting and a good plot. But typical Hollywood: sequels have to be just about the violence. I can barely remember it after 9 horrible money-grabbing sequels.

And good actors have been wasted in the sequels, such as Dina Meyer, Cary Elves, Sean Patrick Flannery and of course Jigsaw himself Tobin Bell.

Do not waste a minute of your time on this disgusting display of senseless brutal violence. Not even if you're paid to see it. It's sheer torture to sit through this or any of the 8 other sequels.

Personally I'd rather watch paint dry.

Only good thing to say is that this really was the final chapter as it has been 6 years since this turd of a movie came out.

But Hollywood that has run completely out of ideas and they keep rebooting everything and they will most likely reboot Saw as well at one point. And it will be terrible. Like every other reboot out there.

The Lazarus Project (2008)

A hell of a lot better than Shutter Island

[7/10 · 3 March 2016]

This film is similar in the plot like Shutter Island that came two years later. The difference is that this movie is a lot better. And I'm guessing Scorsese was greatly inspired by this movie. Only this wasn't a Scorsese picture with Leonardo Di Caprio in it so nobody noticed this.

Some of the best acting from the late Paul Walker. Those of you who thinks he was just a pretty face, watch this.

I don't wanna give away too much, except to say that the ending of this movie is a lot more satisfying than the stupid twist and ending of Shutter Island.

Another difference is that this movie is very quiet in it's pace and it doesn't try so hard to come off as a horror movie like the moronic Shutter Island, because it doesn't need to.

I definitely recommend this movie. And if you haven't seen either this or Shutter Island, watch this and pretend Shutter Island don't excist.

Vertigo (1958)

Hitchcocks most boring among his "classics"

[1/10 · 19 February 2016]

I love North by Northwest, Birds and Psycho.

But Vertigo is too long and too boring.

The story in it self is interesting enough but it should have been at least half an hour shorter. Especially because the ending (Judy and the Madeleine is the same person) is obvious from the moment he knocks on her door. Also why would they pull off a staged suicide that well and she would be dumb enough to stay in the city in the exact same room? Why didn't they just made it seem like the wife was murdered and frame John for the murder? How can John just leave a place where he's been committed?

And most importantly: why did Hitchcock insist on using crappy studio shots for almost every outdoor location, whenever the actors were talking?? This actually annoyed me so much that I had a hard time concentrating on enjoying the movie!! Even in 1958 those awful background matte paintings must have looked so fake. Or the scene in the forest or by the ocean or the bay where it's all studio shots!! Or the night painting of the city in Midges apartment!! Or every shot of an actor driving with a fake background in the rear window.

It seems profoundly stupid, when they had already shot a lot outside!! I just don't get why???

The X-Files: Re-Opened (2015 TV Movie)

Why?

[1/10 · 9 February 2016]

That is a good question. And the obvious reason is money.

Let me start by saying I loved the original show. Hence my username here on IMDb: I particularly loved the badguy Alex Krycek. But I loved the whole show. It was different from any other show at that time. It was scifi and horror and drama and comdedy at the same time. A lot of fun. And each episode felt like a small movie.

In the middle of the original series they made the first featurefilm: Fight the future which was awesome. Then 6 years after the show got cancelled they made a second movie: I want to believe which was awful and had nothing to do with the show.

And now this. Which is at least 10 years too late.

David Duchovny looks old and tired. Gillian Anderson looks like she had way too many botox injections and she sounds like she has a soar throat as well as looking tired.

The energy and fun of the show in the 90'ies is gone. What is left is a decent but from my point of view unnecessary reboot/reunion. They should have left this alone. But the reboot is a big success so we will probably see more so-called seasons. 6 episodes is not a season. In the old show a season contained 22 or 23 episodes. I get that Duchovny is old and tired and don't wanna do full seasons anymore as he joked in an interview at some point. But if his heart is not in it he should'nt bother. I also get that both Duchovny and Anderson play the characters differently as they're both a lot older. But it's like watching them solve cases as a retired old couple who know longer have the energy to even look remotely interested as they say their lines. Nor do they seem to care about the cases they're given. They're just going through the motions. The worst part of it all is that they're both so much better actors than this.

As for unanswered questions like what happened to their son William etc etc I couldn't care less 14 years later, not counting the second movie.

This reboot seems lazy, boring and pointless.

The only good thing that has come out of this is the real old show released in stunning bluray quality. I most likely won't be watching anymore "seasons" but instead enjoy the old show that had so much more to offer.

As far as I'm concerned I will pretend this reboot don't exist, just like the second movie.

If you truly love the old show I suggest you rewatch that and avoid this reboot.

Burnt (I) (2015)

So boring I had to pinch myself to stay awake

[1/10 · 10 January 2016]

I saw this in a very small, very hot screening room with as little room for my legs as on plane. And filled with people. It was claustrophobic as hell and I wanted to get out and looked at my watch 20 times when I was not pinching myself to stay awake.

This was sheer torture.

A movie so boring that only women who find Bradley Cooper dreamy can enjoy watching. Along with either their boyfriends that they forced to watch it with them or their girlfriends.

The movies running time of an hour and 41 minutes felt like 3 hours.

And the lead is basically an a-hole and an arrogant douche bag that it's impossible to care for.

I recommend this to women and gay men and chefs. Every one else should avoid this like the plague.

Ash vs Evil Dead (2015–2018)

I absolutely love this!!

[10/10 · 8 January 2016]

After the awful remake of the original Evil Dead in 2013, I had given up on seeing the wisecracking extremely funny Ash kick some serious deadite ass ever again.

This show is pure genius. Bruce Campbell is back as an aging Ash. He's still just as funny, irresponsible, stupid and a womanizer as we love him.

But this time around we have more time to get to know Ash, who without losing his cool is way more a real person with a conscious, than he ever was in the movies, where there was no time for character development.

Ash is still working as a stock-boy, living in a trailer with the same messed up car as in the movies. Now with a wooden hand he tell much younger women in bars heroic lies about how he lost his hand. And it works every time.

One night he smokes some hash with a woman he picked up and to impress her he takes out the Necronomicon and reads to her, unknowingly summoning deadites. And then all hell literally brakes lose. After severalpeople have been turned into deadites and killed, including his own boss, he teams up with two young colleagues Pablo and Kelly. Pablo is as stupid and funny as Ash and Kelly is hot. Together they start fighting back, followed by two hot women, a cop who thinks Ash is responsible for the murders and deadites. And a mysterious woman played by the always smoking hot Lucy Lawless, who knows Ash from the old days (Evil Dead 2) looking for payback and with her she has Ashes cut off human hand which is still alive and possessed.

The show is even more graphical than the movies and they use real blood and practical effects with only very little CG when it's necessary.

The deadites are even funnier than in the movies and fans will not be disappointed.

I recommend this to every one!!

Cyborg (1989)

Dumb and retarded movie

[1/10 · 30 December 2015]

From the horrible matte painting in the opening shot to the plastic knifes and the plastic chains to the ridiculous customes and the horrible lines and the so called acting, this has got to be one of the worst movies ever made.

This is so amateurishly badly made that me and my friends could have made a more convincing movie with a video camera and no budget at all.

How a movie like this could ever get a green-light and even be allowed to get a theatrical release is beyond me.

My friend and I could'nt stop laughing at how bad this was.

I recommend this to no one.

Black Mass (2015)

Why Black Mass and Depp sucks

[1/10 · 18 December 2015]

Sure, Johnny Depp is almost unrecognizable and sinister and creepy as the real life gangster James Whitey Bulger.

But he is not creepy enough. He never seems out of control and totally insane like Heath Ledger's joker in The Dark Knight.

It's not just that Depp is unlikeable, he's suppose to be unlikeable, its more the fact that there isn't a single likable character in the movie.

Joel Edgerton ticked me off from the moment he appeared in the movie. He looked constipated and fat. And not once was he not wearing a suit where even his neck was covered by the collar of his shirt. I hated his suits and his big hair. Like everyone else in the movie he was scum.

The movie is in general depressing and boring. As bad as Good Fellas, which in my opinion is one of the crappiest and most overrated gangster movies ever made.

And I love good gangster movies like Donnie Brasco, another gangster movie with Depp where he is so much better. Or The Untouchables or Scarface. Masterpieces within their genre.

This could have been an interesting movie if Depp have had the guts to play Bulger like a complete psycho. Like Al Pacino in Scarface. Sure he kills several people violently, but even that is done boring. If there had been even one character worth rooting for it could also have improved the movie.

Black Mass is one cliché after another and it goes completely by the book as far as gangster movies go which unfortunately makes it very very boring.

Case 39 (2009)

Can't decide its own genre

[5/10 · 29 November 2015]

For most of the movie it's a psychological horror-piece and that's when it works best. But in the entire third act it changes genre and becomes supernatural.

*SPOILER AHEAD* I'm not gonna ruin it too much for you except to say it's about Lilith a girl that, Emelie socialworker, gets legal custody over after her parents have been committed, having tried to kill their own daughter.

But the girl Lilith, creepingly played by Jodelle Ferland, is not the sweet and innocent victim of abusive parents as she seems to be.

She is evil and is responsible for her all of her parents siblings dying after she was born. But not by actually killing them herselves. She can will people to kill themselves by exposing them to their biggest fear, making them kill themselves accidentally trying to escape their fears.

And this is where the movie becomes troubling for me. Because had the girl just been plain evil and killed people herself, that would have been plenty scary. But when it's revealed at one point that she's not even human but a supernatural monster disguised as an innocent looking girl then it becomes ridiculous. When the girl changes her appearance to a male looking devil figure with sharp teeth and when the girls mother comes after Emily as a ghost, that's when I got annoyed.

I don't have a problem with supernatural horror (i love the series Supernatural) but this movie can't decide whether it wants to scare people psychologically or by showing ghosts and creatures.

It's nice that it is R rated which allows for some gruesome graphic deaths and that there are no limits as to what they can show.

However Renee Zellweger is annoying as the socialworker speaking with the same little girl voice as Jodelle Ferland throughout the movie. And her performance is not convincing either. Her transition for loving Lilith and wanting to take care of her to to her being afraid of Lilith is just not coinvincing.

The movies best performances are Jodelle Ferland and Ian Macshane. Bradley Cooper is less convincing as a children's psychologist. Al though his death is the most violent and graphical in the movie and he is sympathetic enough that I want him to live.

But if you want a truly scary movie with a creepy little girl I recommend watching the much scarier movie: Orphan instead. It's also R-rated which I think is a must in the horror genre. And a much better horror movie with pretty much the same premise. But executed much better.