dragonmaster0303 Reviews

Zombie Diaries (2006)

Awful

[1/10 · 5 June 2008]

Ask yourself a question...

If someone went out for the day, say to the countryside, took a camcorder with them and videoed everyday mundane things (wobbly views of cars, houses, fields, trees and the like), would you want to watch all 80 minutes of it? If the answer is 'NO' then whatever you do, make sure you NEVER watch 'The Zombie Diaries' because basically that's all it is. And don't be fooled into thinking that because it's a film cool and exciting things have to happen, because they most definitely do not. It's just a few people with a camcorder and nothing really happens.

You could make this film yourself in 2 hours.

Seriously, you could.

I'm not joking.

Honest.

Mouth to Mouth (2005)

Instantly forgettable

[3/10 · 4 June 2008]

What can I say about this? Nothing about it is inherently bad (well okay, most of the acting is, but aside from that very obvious fact); it's mostly just a very plodding even boring film of often silly, predictable nothingness. You have your standard stereotypes everywhere, but none of the characters are in any way likable, which in itself doesn't necessarily cause me a problem and maybe this is just the type of film where no one needs to be liked, but either way. It even fails to explore the nature of a cult more deeply (or even at all), which was a wasted opportunity.

One last thing, I've seen a few mentions of this being realistic. My a**e is it realistic! People seem to think that if a film's made on a low budget with no special effects and bad acting that it's realistic. Please stop mistaking hard to watch with realism.

Broken (III) (2006)

Yawn

[2/10 · 22 September 2007]

I think you'll find they misspelled the title of this movie. Only a few letters out, but it should've been BOREDOM, because that suits it down to the ground.

It did start off with a nice dark tone, but never went anywhere and budget restrictions can hardly be blamed because there's no problem with the look of the film, it's simply the screenplay that's lacking.

That's about it really, barely worth even a rental as you're not missing anything.

P.S. I'm sure that by now most people are aware that IMDb reviews are a breeding ground for hype from the people involved in the film itself, if not then beware of all the high ratings/reviews a lesser known film receives, especially early on when the film's newly/barely even been released. You have been warned!

Dead Birds (2004)

Scarecrows – the remake!

[7/10 · 30 August 2007]

On the DVD extras of this movie, the producer claims that the writer had come up with 'a very original idea', so I take it he hasn't seen the 1988 film 'Scarecrows' then? Because I can guarantee you that writer Simon Barrett has! Because this film is basically a rehash of that film, in very much the same way that 'The Blair Witch Project' was a rip-off of 'Cannibal Holocaust', simply replacing the cannibals & jungle with a witch & woods.

Okay, so it's set in a different time, but all the key elements are the same – the armed robbers (they're even heading for Mexico as well, although maybe that's just the only place for fugitives to go from the US!), the stolen money & the greed it causes amongst them, the deserted house in the middle of nowhere, one night of horror, the black magic basis (although this is certainly more supernatural), even the 'replacing scarecrows' motif is there.

That said, I do really like this film. Being nearly 20yrs on from 'Scarecrows' technically it's a lot better, the effects are pretty decent & overall it's a good watch. I'd say the film as it is easily deserves an 8, but if you're a hater of plagiarism then half that because if you know 'Scarecrows' then watching this will make your blood boil!

Snuff-Movie (2005)

Great film.

[8/10 · 29 August 2007]

I really hope these one/two star reviewers aren't confusing this with the film 'Snuff' (which really does deserve only one or two stars) because it'd be a shame if people were put off this film by a misunderstanding.

Or perhaps it's just too clever &/or confusing for them? It twists and turns all over the place, in fact I've never seen a movie do so many u-turns! Maybe it's just too much for some people to keep up with and understand - and again it'd also be a shame for anyone to be put off for that reason.

This may not be a Candyman type horror movie (and maybe that's the problem they have - it's not a high budget conventional horror film), but even with a lower budget, Bernard Rose shows he's a great director. I only wish he'd made more horror movies over the years.

Anyway, I love this film and I can honestly say it's got better with each viewing, which is something I can't say for many films and as of yet I have not lost the urge to watch it over and over - surely the sign of a great film. If you like horror, but don't have 'big budget Hollywood' hang-ups and aren't afraid to watch something a little bit different, give this a go.

Feast (2005)

Horrible cheese-fest!

[2/10 · 3 April 2007]

To be fair it takes no time to realise what you're getting yourself into when you start watching "Feast". The god-awful captions for every character immediately show that the writers are unwilling (or more likely incapable) of any kind of character development whatsoever so try to disguise the fact by presumably writing 'funny' (in their tiny minds at least) comments about each character's traits, but unfortunately fall way short of even doing that. Of all the blurbs scattered through the film I smiled once but most of the time I cringed, as I'm sure anyone over the age of twelve will do (the aforementioned age being when I assume the writers met each other, last year at school, and wrote this, in an hour, it's impossible to believe they're any older or took any longer!).

But the writers aren't the only ones at fault here; the director took it upon himself to shoot terribly rapid, jerky camera movements, obviously an attempt to hide the pathetic rubber monsters, so then again maybe that's not his fault after all, but either way the camera work was so bad it reminded me of (believe it or not) an even worse film – "Severed". Any child who picks up a camcorder for the very first time and runs around the room spinning it around will end up with a steadier picture.

Anyhow, I digress, the first half of the movie has more cheese than blood, and there is quite a bit of blood, so that's okay and thankfully the second half of the film is less cheesy and therefore less pathetic, but that's possibly only because there are less of the actors around to spew out as much cheese as earlier, so maybe I shouldn't be giving it the benefit of the doubt.

Either way the second half barely raises the movie up to 'below average', taken at face value this doesn't even make it close to a tenth rate 'Tremors – surrounded by monsters' type film, in fact it wouldn't even be a millionth rate knock off, if there were such a thing.

If they'd managed to get someone over the age of twelve to rewrite the script (or failing that plenty of gags to stop any of the actors speaking and also shot the caption maker), someone to create some decent looking puppets and found a cameraman who wasn't suffering from Parkinson's Disease then this might not have been too bad. But alas, they didn't manage to get any of those so we're stuck with yet another waste of celluloid. Shame really, cause I like Jason Mewes!

Just remember, if you are to watch this movie, be sure to bring plenty of nachos to go with the cheese it'll generously provide!

The Witch's Sabbath (2005)

Fun film!

[5/10 · 1 April 2007]

For anyone wondering about this film, I've decided to make a checklist, so here goes:

Do you like cheap looking B movie sets? (in a fun, cheesy way of course).

Do you like 'Black Magic' symbolism?

Do you like rock music?

Do you like gushing blood? (in a movie, obviously!)

Do you like severed heads/limbs? (see above!)

Do you like big breasted (mostly tattooed) strippers/pole dancers? (but obviously don't care about their acting ability, or to be more accurate, distinct lack of it)

Do you think Ron Jeremy acting as a religious bible salesman is a funny idea?

If you answered 'yes' to all of the above questions, then welcome to your new favourite movie! If you answered 'no' to them all then you'd best pass on this one. Anything in between, give it a go; it's good, harmless fun!

Mansion of the Living Dead (1982)

Where to start...

[4/10 · 1 April 2007]

Well, first things first...

Jess Franco tries, bless him, he really does, but unfortunately the man hasn't had an original thought in his life nor would he know an erotic scenario if it bit him in the arse! (although you can be sure if that ever does happen he'll film it & stick it in a movie!). Before anyone thinks I'm just Franco bashing, I'm not, I've now seen over 60 of his movies so think I've seen enough to have a pretty good idea of what I'm talking about, I even like some!

For anyone not very knowledgeable about his work, the Franco process of film-making seems to go something like this:

1) He sees someone else's film.

2) He quickly rehashes it, adds in some god-awful ugly sex scenes, all of which takes a couple of days and hey presto, a week later the film's released!

And that's about it. I've yet to see an erotic moment in any of his films (though the moments in this one are probably the least annoying of his I've seen) and most of the naked women he's used aren't all that attractive either (although again, to be fair the women in this movie are about the best I've seen in a Franco film), so no real reprieve there.

Personally I prefer it when he leaves out the sex altogether, but even then (as is the case with 'Mansion of the Living Dead') he's so ham fisted in his approach that he generally ruins any element of horror there might've been.

Having said all that, this is still one of my top 10 Franco films, which to be fair says a whole lot more about his other films than it does this one as it's at best only decidedly average!

As a side note, on the region 1 DVD release of this Mr Franco has some very derogatory comments to be made about a certain George A. Romero which I have to say are completely out of order, not to mention contradictory (his comments about them being slow!), especially when you consider the movie Franco was rehashing here was 'Tombs of the Blind Dead' - itself a (great) movie which would never have existed had Romero not redefined the zombie, moved it into modern times and made it into what it still is today! And that's without even getting into comparing the talent of the two men, which is never going to be in Franco's favour! It basically just sounds like sour grapes, as Romero had something which still eludes Franco today - an idea!

Shame on you Jesus!

Robin Hood (2006–2009)

Pathetic nonsense.

[1/10 · 15 October 2006]

It's been a while since I've written a review, but I've been compelled to write this one after watching only 2 episodes of this drivel.

My overriding impression is that it is written by 10yr olds for 10yr olds. It's childish, amateurish and well, simply pathetic. Not to mention most of the cast, who are also near enough children (the casting is terrible – they couldn't have done a worse job if they'd been blindfolded and repeatedly stuck a pin in the telephone directory for choosing the cast). Basically this is a complete waste of time, effort & money.

I see in the trivia that that 4 tapes were swiped and held to ransom, what a shame ALL the tapes weren't swiped and immediately burnt to save us all from having to watch any of it! And come to think of it, the thieves could've done us all a huge favour and gone back and swiped the talent less idiots who created this rubbish and immediately burnt them too, just to save us from ever having to watch anything they ever create again.

Am I being too harsh? Maybe a little, but either way I'll stick with my "Robin of Sherwood" DVD's & I'd urge anyone who's maybe too young to know what that series is like to give it a go & be prepared to see something light years ahead of this poor incarnation of the green-tighted bandit.

Wild Zero (1999)

Lock 'n' Loll!

[8/10 · 5 February 2006]

Well okay, if you've seen this you'll laugh at the title of my review, if you haven't seen it then why not? Go and watch it, see what I mean and then laugh!

This is one hell of a high octane, barnstorming, rip-roaring, head-pumping, hard rocking movie right here!

Great soundtrack! - Yes

Great fun! - Yes

Great plot! – Well, umm, actually, no, but who cares, it's fun!

Is it mad? - Yes.

Does it make sense? - Hell no!

Does it matter? – No because it's fun!

If you like loud music, laughing, flaming exhausts & exploding zombie heads then give this a go, you'll love it, I did!

Oh, and that's one hell of a trick there Guitar Wolf, cutting down an Alien spaceship with a Samurai sword! Way to go! I didn't mention weird did I? Silly me!

Everyone together now – Lock 'n' Loll!

Man Behind the Sun (1988)

Did I really just watch the same film as everyone else?!?

[5/10 · 5 February 2006]

Maybe it was the fact that I watched the dubbed version (I had no choice as for some reason the subtitles didn't work), which for the first half hour or so was so campy that if the accents hadn't been American I would've swore I was watching a Carry On film! It really was that funny in a slapstick kind of way.

Now I've had this DVD for quite some time and having read all the reviews and expected the worst, plus generally with this type of movie I'm never in a great hurry to watch them anyway, I'd waited until I was in the right frame of mind. So I waited. And waited. And then I watched it. Oh, the disappointment! Is this all a huge joke? I wonder.

As for realism, all I can say is that I implore none of you who think this movie is realistic to never, EVER go near the second in the Guinea Pig series, because quite frankly, you'd probably die. Seriously. You'd die.

Now to the actual tortures/deaths… First off the baby in the snow, that was just so corny it was funny! And the two arm freezing incidents were hilariously badly done, umm, realistic? I think not! Funny? Incredibly!

The live autopsy on the boy was poorly done, although the gore looked fairly real, the fact that the boy's skin colour was completely different to that of the body being dissected ruined it completely, especially as the editing meant we kept switching between his head and shoulders and then the lower part of his body. I'd have expected skin colour would've been a high priority when making a realistic fake body, but then that's just me.

Now the piece de resistance – the man whose intestines were forced to shoot out of his bottom at high velocity! Yes, even though it was well done and somewhat disgusting, it really is as funny as it sounds! I laughed out loud on seeing this part, but then admittedly did feel slightly ashamed because it was so sick. I guess it's similar to laughing at people with Tourettes; you know it's wrong, but you just can't help it because it's so damn funny!

Add to all of this the cheerfully dancing man who disposes of the bodies, whiskey bottle always in hand, and again; it is more comedy than horror.

For the record, in my opinion the infamous cat scene, although quite well done, is faked. You can clearly see the rats nibbling at the red syrup that's been poured on the (probably drugged) cat which barely struggles but its eyes give the game away, while being nowhere near its skin. It's not unusual for a person connected with this type of thing to claim parts are real simply for hype and that's all this cat business is.

The burning rats scene however is completely real, but then no one cares about rats, right? lol

I do appreciate that the fact these things (probably) happened is a very scary and horrific thought, but I'm sorry, that doesn't necessarily make a scary and horrific film. I definitely laughed more than I was sickened or horrified, but then maybe this is one of those times when you actually had to be there (for real!).

Masters of Horror: Dance of the Dead (2005) Season 1, Episode 3

Utterly awful, this disgrace should've been buried.

[1/10 · 4 February 2006]

Now, I can't blame Tobe Hooper for the weak story/screenplay (the blame for that lies with Richard Matheson). Nor can I blame him (I don't think) for the poor casting and subsequent terrible acting performances from all concerned (yes, including old Freddy Krueger himself!). But what I can most definitely blame Mr Hooper for is the pathetically poor directing, which was at best annoying and completely ineffectual. Whatever he was trying to do failed majestically.

It's abundantly clear that Tobe Hooper is living on (unmerited) past glories, indeed, none of his efforts since 'A Texas Chainsaw Massacre', are even worth a second look. And I wouldn't really recommend his supposed masterpiece (the previously mentioned TCM) to anyone either, it's a movie which has gained a sizable reputation that far outweighs the actual movie (mainly thanks to the video nasty bans in the eighties and the hype from people who've never actually seen it). The man just doesn't seem to have a clue.

I was looking forward to this series so much, but now after seeing this episode (only the second aired here in the UK) my hopes have been severely shattered! Maybe the producers of the series did this deliberately and gave Tobe Hooper enough rope to hang himself by giving him the worst episode to direct, knowing that he'd make a big fool of himself? I for one hope so, because I really wanted this series to be fantastic.

Despite Mr Hooper's efforts to single-handedly kill the 'Masters of Horrors' series, I'm still living in hope, simply on the basis that things can only get better!!

The Amityville Horror (2005)

I'm truly and utterly disgusted.

[3/10 · 26 January 2006]

For the love of God (or the Devil if you prefer) please stop 'remaking' horror films!

It's simply a way for greedy studio executives to cash in on gullible moviegoers, who they just know are going to spend their hard earned cash on watching these high profile horror films.

You're lucky if these so called 'remakes' retain five percent relevance to the original movies they're meant to, in essence, be. And to make matters far worse, some of them would actually be quite good movies on their own merit if they were stand alone films (The Texas Chainsaw Massacre springs to mind, I quite liked that).

If someone wants to make, as in this instance, a haunted house movie (and in the case of 'Dawn of the Dead' a zombie movie, etc), then just make a damn haunted house/zombie/vampire or whatever movie and stop pretending they're ridiculous, stupid, pathetic, pointless f****** remakes of classic films!

If you hadn't noticed, this review was brought to you by a very p***** off horror movie lover.

Santa Sangre (1989)

Umm, BIZARRE kind of sums it up!

[7/10 · 25 January 2006]

The big question about this film is this: Do you need to be on drugs to watch it or was the director on enough for all of us when he made it? I guess since I'm drug free it must be the latter.

Certainly bizarre, one passage sees a group of down syndrome people excitedly eating fruit, three of whom are then taken into the city where a pimp offers them some cocaine which they snort & then proceed down a street of prostitutes who sing and dance like they're in a Hollywood musical and then the three of them walk off with the biggest, fattest, ugliest hooker you ever did see. Or maybe she was a Madam, to be honest I gave up trying to understand, it barely matters with this one! Oh, there's a midget, an elephant that's torn apart, cripples, a tattooed lady, a mute, a muscle bound female wrestler (or to be more accurate, a man with breasts wearing a wig!), not to mention a band of annoying clowns that follow people around playing songs, in there too.

Did I mention the word bizarre? I didn't even get to the part where it rains chickens. The fact that I've missed out dozens of other things I could've mentioned points to the fact that there are just far too many ideas being thrown together for any real coherence and chances are that you will lose interest several times due to your brain liquidising. Although that said, thankfully the plot is pretty simple, believe it or not, and it is kind of a fun ride all the same.

Add all this to the boy who's so traumatized after witnessing the death of his father (wonderful sequence including wig removing, throat cutting, acid to the genitals & slicing off of arms) he takes to sleeping in a basket and living up a tree like a monkey. I think I'll join him.

Masters of Horror (2005–2007)

*Review of the episode 'Dance of the Dead' (and Tobe Hooper) only, not the series*

[7/10 · 21 January 2006]

Now, I can't blame Tobe Hooper for the weak story/screenplay (the blame for that lies with Richard Matheson). Nor can I blame him (I don't think) for the poor casting and subsequent terrible acting performances from all concerned (yes, including old Freddy Krueger himself!). But what I can most definitely blame Mr Hooper for is the pathetically poor directing, which was at best annoying and completely ineffectual. Whatever he was trying to do failed majestically.

It's abundantly clear that Tobe Hooper is living on (unmerited) past glories, indeed, none of his efforts since 'A Texas Chainsaw Massacre', are even worth a second look. And I wouldn't really recommend his supposed masterpiece (the previously mentioned TCM) to anyone either, it's a movie which has gained a sizable reputation that far outweighs the actual movie (mainly thanks to the video nasty bans in the eighties and the hype from people who've never actually seen it). The man just doesn't seem to have a clue.

I was looking forward to this series so much, but now after seeing this episode (only the second aired here in the UK) my hopes have been severely shattered! Maybe the producers of the series did this deliberately and gave Tobe Hooper enough rope to hang himself by giving him the worst episode to direct, knowing that he'd make a big fool of himself? I for one hope so, because I really wanted this series to be fantastic.

Despite Mr Hooper's efforts to single-handedly kill the 'Masters of Horrors' series, I'm still living in hope, simply on the basis that things can only get better!!

Blessed (2005)

Well, I've given it a chance.....

[2/10 · 2 December 2005]

....and now I'm up to episode #7. I really was hoping it'd be over by now (not to mention canceled, once everything connected with the show -including the actors - had been dumped along with some toxic waste in the middle of the ocean somewhere, never to be seen again), because this series really is dire.

To have this program listed under the genre of 'comedy' is at best misleading! It's so hard to believe Ben Elton could write something this bad, maybe this points to a lot of input from the other writers in everything he's been connected with before. In some episodes I haven't even laughed once!

Oh, and I can't believe Ardal O'Hanlon actually stopped doing 'My hero' & started doing this instead, his decision making skills were obviously impaired that day - perhaps he simply can't read, and didn't realise just how poor the scripts for 'Blessed' were. Don't get me wrong, 'My Hero' is not masterpiece, but it's a million times better than this piece of junk.

And just to annoy me even more I bet this gets a DVD release as well, when there are so many great TV series' that aren't getting released!

The Monster Man (2001 Video)

Oh dear......

[1/10 · 11 October 2005]

I do applaud 'writer/director' Jose Prendes for trying.... but I really could strangle him for succeeding!

This is horrible, it really is. I seriously can't say anything good about this drivel. I doubt that even if you're a fan of bad movies you'll get anything at all out of this, other than a good sleep possibly. And as for his acting, that shouldn't be allowed under some human rights legislation or other. It's very painful to humans and quite possibly animals too if they're unfortunate enough to watch any of this by accident.

I see that he's written two more films since this one and directed one of them. Lord help us!

Someone really should take all his cameras and equipment off him to save us more grief. Oh, and his pens and pencils too. Not to mention any computer/word processing equipment he might have. In fact we'd better chop off his hands and rip out his tongue while we're at it. And can't people communicate with their eyes too? Let's pluck those out and slice off the eyelids just for good measure. And what if he's telepathic and could still communicate his ideas to someone else? I think the only way we're all going to be safe would be to decapitate him.

I'll volunteer.