poyrazbaklan Reviews

Red Dawn (2012)

the silliness is excruciating

[3/10 · 3 March 2013]

While the original Red Dawn was founded on a rather unlikely scenario (Soviets suddenly invading with no apparent battle plan, high school kids with no training takes up arms...)it was still a solid film with believable characters, a decent brothers in arms story with some cool action scenes. It is still a quality film, some bad acting aside. Even though it was highly improbable that a bunch of high school jocks would be tremendously successful with guerrilla tactics against a formidable enemy, still it ended on a more realistic note, patriotism and all. Pointing a gun skyward and yelling "wolverines!" is still a decent pop culture reference in the media. This remake on the other hand, does absolutely everything wrong, save the action scenes.(more on them later) It doesn't bother with making sense on a ground level, with highly militaristic North Korea being the big bad and being aided by the Russians. We are given a bit of explanation in the beginning, with U.N weakening with the economic downfall and the East expanding but that is all. How Korea drops hundreds of thousands of troops on U.S soil, and keeping it is unknown. Is this a global war? Nuclear apocalypse? What about U.S troops stationed abroad? In the original this sense of ignorance about global threat could explained by the main characters being stranded guerrillas, with no means of communications, here however they have functioning TVs and cell phones. In one scene the only believable character, the pretty boy marine big brother shuts off the TV, saying they have stuff to do. There is also no nice antagonist, the main bad guy is Captain Cho, who has maybe five lines of dialogue, and is disposed off rather easily(not a spoiler, you see it coming), we also have the Spetznaz commander, who has none, with maybe thirty seconds of screen time. To be fair, the action scenes are well done, with enough explosions and gunfire, and with enough Korean soldiers with stormtrooper aim being gunned down. But it is made all the worse by actors speaking really silly lines, and some generic marine characters left and right. Too bad one of them is jeffrey dean morgan, who usually boasts more charisma than that. And worst of all is the main character matt, who with his always sunken eyes and sad look, makes for a very,very bad leader for the resistance. In one scene he leaves his post to save his girlfriend, getting one of the gang killed and he mourns for a whole two seconds. In another one, they leave a guy who was with them the whole time, behind because the Russians put a tracker on him, which doesn't look very hard to cut out. (not that I'm a physician) The problem isn't the unbelievable concept, it is that the characters here take themselves too seriously, then five seconds later they do something silly or so vapid that you realize these are just high school kids playing call of duty on camera.(also mentioned by one of them) In the end, when it reaches a level where they just put a minigun on a blue sports car and go raid pow camps, where prisoners who already have huge flags in hand were waiting for them, you kind of expect the actors to go ahead and jump the shark with it.

All Superheroes Must Die (2011)

waste of time and (a small amount of) money

[3/10 · 23 February 2013]

When a movie is small budget, it doesn't automatically make it bad, on the contrary I have seen a lot of movies which were fairly successful in their own ways no matter what they cost the filmmakers. It just takes a fair amount of creativity,imagination and quick thinking that usually overcomes the obstructions it brings. Unfortunately these are the skills the director lacks here. The idea is fairly good. Four heroes, stripped of their powers, must play a deadly game in a town under siege by a maniacal man, played by James Remar no less. Think of Saw meets the Avengers, I heard. The end result is far, far from what I had hoped though. The heroes origins are never explained, instead using some flashbacks about their past which amount to nothing at all. The director says he made this to trick the viewer into becoming a fish-out-of-water, just like the heroes, but then why are the flashbacks there? Other than Charge, the heroes barely get screen time and the deadly games they play is all the same, just kill one another. There is a small twist near the end about Charge's origins but it really doesn't make a lot of sense. And the plot holes are a plenty. How can he triangulate Rickshaw's signal by just marking the map? Why does the villain have goons in animal costumes? What's with the two villains and the inability to cut a fuse? How come the whole town is rigged with cameras and Rickshaw doesn't see Charge approach him? There are many like this, and the worst is the suddenly- cut-to-black ending, which no wonder will make you disappointed. I really wanted to like this film but viewers need and deserve more, it is commendable to shoot a movie with little money and time. But at least it could have a decent script.

The Guyver (1991)

like a power rangers episode

[4/10 · 13 February 2013]

If you looked at the poster and naturally thought mark hamill wears a power suit and fights monsters, you would be wrong. He is one of the main characters but doesn't actually do anything. It's a guy named Sean who finds the Guyver unit and accidentally activates it, becoming a superhero. Apparently the aliens came to Earth thousands of years ago and created humans as weapons, and not content with the result, also created zoanoids, mutated humans. All the vampires and werewolves and the like were zoanoids all along. And they also created guyver as the ultimate weapon in the galaxy. For something that is called the most destructive weapon since the a- bomb, the guyver doesn't actually have any weapons. He just aikido throws and fist fights enemies into submission, all the while doing cartwheels all over the place. The plot is light, characters aren't at all likable and mark hamill is barely in the movie. But then again you can see why. It is a light action movie with a comedic tone. The creature effects are impressive, given that each of them is actually guys in costume. The jokes and punchlines are terrible but that's what puts it into the b-movie category. Michael berryman's character and jeffrey combs cameo are amusing, and coming from brian yuzna, body horror elements are a bunch. It isn't one of those so-bad-it's-good movies, but still a decent watch. Just skip forward during the gremlin zoanoid starts rapping.

Here Comes the Boom (2012)

incredibly average

[4/10 · 13 February 2013]

First of all, when you hear Kevin James, the lovably clumsy chubby guy, doing an mma movie, you no doubt will have doubts. It sure is a comedy but how will he pull it off? Will it be about him going in the cage and doing slapstick routines or maybe the movie will fit the fight scenes in a montage and focus on the comedic parts. Apparently it's not, James sure pulls it off and although it is kind of unbelievable to see him do roundhouse kicks, the fight scenes are decent to watch. Yet, the rest of the movie..just...isn't. This has been done before, in the perfectly average nacho libre, which in turn was inspired by the true story of Fray Tormenta. People are wrong about complaining how the jokes in this movie aren't funny, because there are hardly any jokes at all. It is rather set up as an inspiring movie, just short of drama, with some scenes of james falling down or getting punched, just to make it more comedic. Other than the "teacher needs money for school so he fights" setting, there is no story to speak of. I think the producers just thought about putting Fonzi, Kevin james and mma fighters in a room and waited for hilarity to ensue, and it just didn't happen. Though henry winkler is a little over the top with his devoted music teacher attitude and including Bas rutten is also a nice touch, the rest of the movie is in shambles. It is not bad, it just isn't a comedy, or simply not good enough.

Dorian Gray (2009)

could have been better...don't know how though

[5/10 · 13 January 2013]

A rather visually appealing adaptation of the book, Dorian Gray fails on most other aspects. For those who haven't read it, it is a rather short novel about a young noble who has a portrait of him made and through reasons never explained, the portrait is supernatural, aging and visually deteriorating while Dorian stays the stud that he is, no matter how many years pass and how many evil deeds he perform. It is a nice idea and the book is a rather nice read. But, was a screen adaptation really necessary? I mean it is a short book and not that much happens in that sense. The movie stays true to the book, in a sense the slow descent of a handsome and promising man into a decrepit life within the facade of the lavish and luxury life of the rich. The environments are well detailed and the characters are well played out but to be fair, there is very little to them. Dorian's betrayal of Sybil(who is played by maddeningly pretty Rachel Hurd-Wood) is so glossed over and artificial and although Ben Barnes portrays him as charming at first, the character is not all that appealing to watch. In the book the portrait is never illustrated in full detail, you have to assume what becomes of it as time passes. Here you see the creepy thing and worse, the movie treats it almost as a horror movie object, with groans and twitches emanating from it.(admittedly freaky) All in all, I did not like the movie, because there is just so less to see in it, most of the scenes are padding between the portrait being painted and what becomes of Dorian. Nothing interesting happens in between and Colin Firth is non-existent even with his usual charm and quirks, he could have been the perfect Mephisto to Dorian's Faust yet he plays the role poorly. Not bad, but not worth the time either.

Jason Goes to Hell (1993)

A body-hopping Jason? Really?

[2/10 · 6 January 2013]

The last chapter(but not really)in the Jason franchise, this movie is the shameful child of the series that fans do not talk about much. Like the kid that is sent to his room to hide when guests come over. How hard is it to screw up a Friday the 13th movie? You just watch it for the grisly murders of young people and mindless scares, but the director lacked the irony when he decided to exclude Jason out of all this. Really, our hockey-mask donning villain appears in the first five and the last ten minutes of the movie. Why, you ask? Because of his body swapping skills, of course. Due to him being killed in an FBI operation early in the movie, he lacks a body now. But all this time we didn't know (and I mean eight movies) that if his heart survives he can just hop into another body and live on! So the movie suddenly becomes more of a zombie movie where he just dons people as suits and murders anyone on his way. It is now up to our laughably inept heroes to save the day, since Jason can only be sent to Hell by another Voorhees. Although the cross-over references with Evil dead and Freddy are clever, the rest of the movie is in shambles, bad acting, forceful comedic scenes and not enough scares aside, the plot holes with the body- swapping theme is off the roof. In one scene we see Jason in one body just going all brutish on people then in another he is clever enough to disguise himself as a deputy and trick people with it. I assure you that this is the worst in the franchise and I didn't think it was possible after new blood or jason takes manhattan.

Dredd (2012)

not bad...not bad at all

[7/10 · 1 January 2013]

I remember when the first judge dredd movie came out, it was a big deal. It had stallone, diane lane AND armand assante, a cool storyline and action scenes and pretty good cgi. So when it bombed, people were quite surprised. I personally like that movie very much, it was an ambitious one. All in all, dredd was never this mainstream comic book character people idolized or even knew very much but the post-apocalyptic crime ridden city and the judges kind of impressed me, and mainly because I was ten years old at the time. Now when I heard that they were shooting a new one in 3D, I was not very impressed, Karl Urban, who I consider not built to be portraying action heroes(hear me, DOOM) was going to portray Dredd and it would have a more simplistic story. Then again, I was wrong. It turned out to be quite a nice movie. Sure it doesn't have the set action pieces of its predecessor or even a cool plot that makes you wonder what will happen next, but it is a fun watch. Instead of an over-arching plot that changes the foundations of the franchise, they instead opted for a smaller adventure, within dredd's life, as in a days work. It is a buddy cop movie, much like lethal weapon. Lena Headey is overacting but is admittedly impressive as the hooker-turned-gangboss and dredd is alright as the no-nonsense judge. The movie is chock-full of tie-ins and easter eggs towards the comic, including dredd's never taking his helmet of. Urban's "I am the law" is not as iconic as Stallone's laughably over the top impression but playing whole scenes with only your mouth showing is admirable. All in all it is a watch and forget movie, with scenes clearly shot to make use of 3D and slo-mo effects(if you run them on normal speed the movie would be like 50 minutes long)But it is still fun to watch, nevertheless. They could have made the world look a little more grim though, the outside shots look like your ordinary metropolis(it was shot in johannesburg, I read) and not some grim-distant future megacity.

Bats: Human Harvest (2007 TV Movie)

so awful...just so...awful

[1/10 · 1 January 2013]

I started to watch this flick thinking it was the Bats movie shot in 99 which is known for being bad but at least entertaining. Within the first minutes I realized a.this is not it and b.this is still bad but not entertaining at least a little. It is such a small budget that you would think some college dropouts shot it within a weekend, while they are terribly intoxicated. There is no plot to think of, no characters. Okay, you can say in a movie called bats:human harvest, I should be mad to look for engaging story or characters but the main character is so full of clichés that you can guess they were trying to establish him as one. He is this loose cannon who clearly endangers his and the teammates lives to get the job done. Now I am no soldier but I can say this kind of behavior could get you jail time, not a slap on the wrist like what he gets. Anyway, the team is dropped in a jungle full of Russian spetsnaz, chechen militia and of course, giant mutated flesh eating bats because, why not. The main enemy is the doctor who modified the bats and was using them as a bio-weapon. Long story short we get lots of scenes of bad cgi flocking on people, plush bats being thrown at characters and some bad Russian accents. It is 90 minute bore and no memorable scenes to even make fun of. Pass this on, watch Troll 2 or something.

Perfect Stranger (2007)

it is much dumber than it acts like it

[3/10 · 26 December 2012]

I watched perfect stranger in hopes of a smart thriller, maybe close to(but not like) identity or insomnia. Yet the main premise is so dull and unpromising that not only it bored the stuff out of me, it also made me shout at how dumb the characters were. First of all, Halle Berry's character is supposedly a smart journalist, yet she is definitely computer illiterate. In one scene she had this picture on the screen that her boss isn't supposed to see, and of course he shows up, at the same time the screen somehow freezes. And what does she do instead of turning the screen off? She panics and tries to unplug the cable with her foot. I know scenes like this are supposed to build up tension but come on! In another one she uploads a virus and gets busted by the antivirus software. Instead of shutting the software, she calls giovanni ribisi and this time he(apparently more computer-savvy than her) tells her there is no way past it and they will try later. In any case the movie is so slow paced and so devoid of any actual thrills that you never feel hooked up to it. Even in the end you see what is coming(the other characters somehow fail to do it) and watch the credits dumbfounded and not entertained in any way.

The Howling: Reborn (2011 Video)

a werewolf movie, devoid of werewolves

[2/10 · 26 December 2012]

When you expect so little from a movie and it fails to meet even your lowest expectations, you know it is one of the worst. I like werewolves and I liked the howling. I thought the remake would be at least decent. But no, not at all. First of all, we do not see a werewolf till the 65 minute mark, and even then it is a naked guy with furry trousers. Even though there are some lycan on lycan action towards the end, it is ruined by quick pacing and close shots. The first part of the movie is basically the first spiderman and the rest is incoherent, plot less and dumb. Though the writers say this is not a remake but a version from some novel also called howling, it is nonsense since the "getting werewolves on camera to prove they are real" scene is there. Now when you have a decent work done, you can include inside jokes like "no werewolves were harmed during the making" but when the hero stabs the intimidating muscle-bound werewolf with a necklace and kills it instantly, thereby destroying the viewers hopes to witness some action scenes, you should know you have done a terrible job. And what's with the ending? So the Alfa is not dead, and werewolf apocalypse actually began? What's the point of including cliffhanger when it is obvious you have no chance to shoot sequels?

Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance (2011)

Oh, the silliness burns my eyes

[2/10 · 23 December 2012]

OK first of all, I admit kinda liked the first ghost rider movie. It was silly and the villains and the plot were forgettable but it had some nice action scenes and Eva Mendes. Also ghost rider is all in all a cool anti hero and his scenes with the older ghost rider, accompanied by the catchy (you know it) Ghost riders in the sky was awesome. It wasn't good but enjoyable. I hated this one to my guts. I hated the plot, characters, the acting, every part of it. There was no plot to speak f actually, some random action scenes put together. And to make fun of a character like the ghost rider is no east task, and they failed miserably. Take the infamous fire pissing scene for example. Is it because they are trying to soften up a character, making it more likable as a hero who makes fun of himself? No. Just for the heck of it. And parts of the movie was shot in Urgup, Turkey. I was a little excited that the big and only Nicolas cage was shooting a movie in my country but you hardly see the environment and worse, it is being used for the gathering of this devil worshiping cult. They could have shot the same scenes in a studio if they are not going to show how beautiful looking the whole place is. Needless movie, not worthy of anyone's time.

Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter (2012)

do not judge a book by its....never mind

[4/10 · 23 December 2012]

OK, first of all I haven'r read the book, but I know it is from the same writer that gave us pride and prejudice and zombies so I can easily say it has the same amount of silliness contained within. It is just that taking random pieces of history and rewriting them with supernatural is kind of a good idea, if done right. Not here. Lincoln vs the zombies is very...very stupid. Granted it has good special effects and some minor star power does not give it the gusto that you may expect from a one time flick. It does have some action, a little comic relief and some plot but it doesn't have anything else. It can be summed up as, boy knows vampires exist, boy learns how to fight them, he grows up, then becomes president(that is a spoiler, Abe Lincoln becomes a president) and fights some more vampires. Oh and he literally becomes the president in just one scene, it is like in five minutes its ten years later and he is running the country, civil war and all. And the south is so evil they employ vampires, too. In any case you can watch it with a couple friends and beer but there is not much fun to be had.

Storage 24 (2012)

you probably did not expected much

[4/10 · 21 December 2012]

I actually wanted to see the film after I read about how good it actually was, compared to other syfy alien flicks. Instead of a cheap, computer animated monster, we get an old-school guy in a suit, wreaking havoc. And it is done pretty well. But the mundane plot of a cargo plane going down, which was carrying this brute and non-existent character development made me yawn halfway through it. OK the kills are brutal and good, but it is obvious from the start who will survive and the thrills and jump-scares are non existent. The monster is freaky looking but not at all scary. And what was with the toy puppy? I could not believe that I was watching a horror movie when they strapped a toy puppy with fireworks and let it loose on the alien. Of course that doesn't kill him but after that it only takes a tiny crowbar to finally bring him down. I get monster logic worked on hit points on this one. I could have rated higher if only the ending was way different, like in the cargo plane there were hundreds of boxes, what if all of them contained a monster each? That would be a great ending to this otherwise run-off-the-mill movie, but the ending was even more illogical. Full-on alien invasion? Like...how?

The Bourne Legacy (2012)

Great addition to Bourne franchise

[7/10 · 6 December 2012]

I actually had not much hope for this film. The Bourne trilogy is over, the case is closed and there sjould be no more movies, right? Wrong. Expectedly, after Treadstone is compromised due to Jason Bourne's actions, other super agents are left to fend for themselves. I actually don't understand the clandestine government organizations that spend millions on these superhuman agents and then pull the plug in the slightest danger and try to kill them all. I mean, relocating them or even giving them other assignments would be enough but noo they have to send men after them in order to keep it all a secret. I first thought Jeremy Renner(who I doubted would be a good addition to the action genre, and now he kind of makes me take my word back)would be replacing Matt Damon. But then I found out that this is more of a side story and actually liked the plot. The movie starts out slow but then after the first half exponentially picks up the pace and ends with a great chase sequence in Manila. Rachel weisz is impressive as the lab geek, and Edward Norton is well cast as the ruthless investigator. I also hoped Stacy Keach would have more screen time but it was apparently cut down due to the films long running time.(a little more than 2 hrs)The duo of Renner and Weisz does not have the same electricity between them but they still act well and the action shots, most of them looks like they were done in one take, are very good. And the final, rather mysterious super agent antagonist was very well cast. The only thing I did not like was the action takes soo long to pick up but I guess it was necessary to see what has become after Bourne raised a sh.t storm among the government organizations. Give this one a chance, you won't regret

Mr. Woodcock (2007)

where is the comedy?

[3/10 · 5 December 2012]

I actually didn't think Mr. Woodcock did have a lot to start with, including its cheesy pun of a name. Its simplistic plot and memorable actors could have made it into a rather nice movie but it is oh-so empty. It is about John Farley who was bullied by his P.E teacher, played by Billy Bob Thornton and his judging eye brows. He grew up to be successful writer about self-improvement but returns to his hometown and learns that his mother is dating Woodcock(pff) and will marry this nemesis of his. Although at first he doesn't look like he remembers his once fat student, the thing soon escalates between them. And nothing actually happens! There are no comedic scenes to speak of, only some weird situations one after another, which hardly makes anyone laugh. The grudge Farley holds against Woodcock is understandable, scenes of him abusing the poor kids are shown but this leads to no scenes at all. It is understandable that he doesn't wan this man, who has made his life hell, but the story never takes itself seriously enough to show that as a problem. You know they will make up somehow and expect some fun in the middle but, no, nothing comes. Skip this one.

Against the Dark (2009 Video)

Seagal fights vampires is not enough

[1/10 · 5 December 2012]

Apparently someone in the studio came up with a brilliant idea, casting Steven Seagal against the vampires and just shot the movie in a day. There is no script, no character and no action. Seagal just tries to look though but his moves and his lines are as old as he is, he barely fights, just swinging his katana between takes and he unwillingly delivers his lines. The characters and background is never explained. Are these zombies? Vampires? what about the rest of the world? At first they look mindless beasts, but then they speak and outsmart the characters. There is no strong character(Seagal's black sidekick excluded)all of them stand there to say a few though lines, stand up straight and then get cut down in the next scene. And what is Keith David doing there? He has a small role but he stills shows up enough to make you think he overacted for such a small budget and campy film. Even if you are a fan of Steven Seagal or zombies or both(a steven seagal turns into a zombie film would be sweet though)stay away from this one.

Sanctum (2011)

vertical limit! only under the sea!

[2/10 · 5 December 2012]

I watched sanctum just because it included james cameron's name. It is a wrong move I know, but had to do it. And I regret it now. It tells the story of an underwater research team(in an underwater cave to be precise) and their escape attempts during a heavy rainfall which floods the cave. The story is summed up in five minutes and for the rest of the two hours we are treated to actors walking, swimming and climbing similar looking caves, one by one drowning or end up getting injured and well...dead. It is a nice premise and was very well done in the Descent(which was more of a horror movie) but with nothing challenging them, it leads to the characters own mistakes and their dumb luck that causes their deaths. You just wait to see the next character to trip and fall in a crevice, get stuck somewhere or turn on his buddy. Action is lacking, so is suspense. The cave is somewhat impressive but seeing so much of it wears the fun down quickly. The only relief I got was when the survivors reached the surface because then I knew the movie was over.

Piranha 3DD (2012)

campy, exaggerated fun

[6/10 · 5 December 2012]

You will no doubt hear critics ranting about how shallow and disgusting these kind of movies are. The slasher/monster clichés of young, attractive people getting brutally killed on screen is nothing new to the genre and Piranha 3dd takes it to a higher level. No story to speak of, average acting, comical special effects are abound. I said comical but actually the gore scenes and the piranhas are very well done, and the gore is so over the top you can't do much but smirk at the massacre you watch. The people who rated this movie low clearly either walked in the wrong cinema or very different expectations from a movie titled Piranha 3dd. But if you watch it knowing full that there will be about boobs and killer piranhas, you will no doubt have loads of fun. Some nice cameos by David Hasselhoff and Christopher Lloyd are nice gifts also. We need movies like piranha3dd to have dumb,flashy fun so please do not expect to satisfy your intellectual needs out of movies like this one.

Dagon (2001)

H.P Lovecraft be proud

[5/10 · 5 December 2012]

This here is a nice little gem for H.P Lovecraft fans. It is loosely based the "The Shadow over Innsmouth", arguably one of the best works in the Cthulhu Mythos. The low budget, sub-par acting and the scarcity of scares shouldn't bother you. Although if you are a Lovecraft fan, you already know his works aren't based on scares but the disillusionment and the unsettling atmosphere it creates. Dagon is one such work. I remember finding a poorly dubbed copy of it years ago and still have it. The only downside is it is sooo low budget, not many of the story is conveyed, and all of it is told by the perspective of one character and I am not sure this was intentional, this is one movie that can get a higher budget remake and actually be better off.

Spirit: Stallion of the Cimarron (2002)

Decent Dreamworks flick

[5/10 · 5 December 2012]

Spirit:Stallion of the Cimarron is one of the lesser known films in Dreamworks' list. It tells the story of Spirit, a young and strong horse and his quest to find and lead his herd, all set in the time of the westward expansion. Beneath its rather mature themes like taming of the west and treatment of Native American tribes, it is more of a coming of age film. The fact that no animals speak in the movie(although spirit narrates the story) is a nice touch. Though its narrative is rather shallow(it is still a kids movie, sort of) and the songs are average, I enjoyed it but kind of understood why it was so off the radar when other Dreamworks films are regarded more highly. Still it is a decent one, if not great.

Vertical Limit (2000)

Like cliffhanger, though much much stupid

[3/10 · 5 December 2012]

oooh how I hate the vertical limit. The trailer for it was exciting and fast and thought the movie would be the same. Instead we are treated to characters facing boring and stupid dangers on a dumb mission, all the time trying to act like it all matters to them. The dumbest thing in the movie is, professional climbers are sent on a mission to rescue a highly respected, yet asshole businessman(he is played by Bill Paxton, just in case you may not understand he is a jerk at first)who was accompanied by Robin Tunney just to add some whining and screams to the whole rescue thing. The team has high explosives in their backpacks because that is what you should have during a highly dangerous climb(There is a reason they have that but don't ask me I am no rescue climber) so you know somebody is going to blow themselves up. Oh yeah, the dumbest thing, in the end none of this matters since all of them get killed, including Paxton, who falls to his death by one final sacrifice act of one of the climbers so other can survive. So all of the characters are dead just so Robin Tunney can go on, just to get killed in second season of Prison Break. Bang up job, guys!

The Quiet Earth (1985)

a fine example of the "deserted earth" genre

[6/10 · 5 December 2012]

When I first watched The Quiet Earth, I was expecting another run-of-the- mill post-apocalyptic tale. What I got was a whole lot more. The three main actors are convincing and the depiction of a world devoid of people is eerie to say the least. The story of a man waking up in an empty world after a walk on the flat- line, it is gripping to see him discover what might have happened to cause all this. The scenes may get a bit boring for a while since there is no action whatsoever but the characters and the above average acting makes it a worthwhile watch. And the end, which doesn't explain enough and kind of raises more questions, makes it all worth your time.

The Omega Man (1971)

The OMG Man

[4/10 · 5 December 2012]

I just wanted to see a decent adaptation of the Richard Matheson novel "I am legend". I have seen "The Last Man on Earth" which is captivating with its similarity to the novel and its simplicity countered by Vincent Price's acting, it was a very good counterpart to the novel. The omega man,on the other hand, is everything the novel is not. When you see Charlton Heston grabbing a gun, you know it is going to be a) personal b)action filled. The story is not about vampires but about an albino cult that forbids modern technology. Too bad for them, Ben Hur has an arsenal at his disposal and makes short work of the post apocalyptic band, movie is over. Although I might add Anthony Zerbe has charisma as the creepy looking leader and the action scenes are decent enough, it is a shame to adapt the novel like this and leave its main focus out of the picture.

The Raven (I) (2012)

Why Poe? Why him?

[4/10 · 3 December 2012]

The Raven is a sub-par thriller movie, setting John Cusack as Edgar Allen Poe which most of you know as the writer of some awesome horror stories like the Black cat and the Masque of the Red Death, and the famous poem, the Raven. Only the movie is not about him, or any of his works at all. Cusack is so so in his role, he doesn't actually look like how Poe is depicted and his character isn't well developed throughout the movie at all. We only know that he is Poe and he wrote the raven and a bunch of stories and that is it. The real deal is the killer who is murdering people on occasions inspired by Poe's stories. Why? Not explained. Even the killings aren't very well done, since Poe's stories never really focus on the kills but more on the human mind committing them. None of this here. The setting is actually good, with top hats and misty streets obscuring your vision and a Jack the ripper-esque killer on the loose gives you chills but there is no story underneath it all. Poe has to explain each time which story it was because the murders are tangential and not really the same as what his stories tell. And the fact that the real E.A. Poe is found dead on a street is woven into the story when the killer poisons him! See it all comes together! Right?? No!! They should have just made a generic movie and leave Poe out of this, like "In Hell" but noo it had to based on someone.

Dabbe 2 (2009)

this is not Turkish horror, please no!

[2/10 · 3 December 2012]

I thought the first Dabbe movie wasn't very scary but still a decent attempt at horror, despite being obviously inspired by Japanese cinema. And by that I mean some scenes ripped off from Kairo and Ring. Still it scared a pretty bunch of people that they decided to film a sequel. So apparently they gave the director a camera, a couple actors and exactly two hours to film the whole thing. You can "feel" the plot going nowhere, even the actors aren't very convinced that this is a professional movie and not some video someone would shot to put on youtube. The premise is actually good. It is the end times and the world is about to end, in the shape of a black smoke descending from the sky to...make people zombies? There is scene where the destruction is seen on TV, and it is kind of good, not because it is very well done, no but it is not everyday we see Istanbul getting demolished in a movie, with fires and downing bridges and all. But the rest is characters getting scared by nothing on screen, and how do we know that? They keep saying "I am so scared, God I am really scared this time!" I thought director Hasan Karacadag really had good intentions with the first movie, trying to create a Turkish horror franchise, and when that botched I thought he did not have enough skill. Now with this one, I am not even sure of what he was trying to do.