29 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
4/10
NOT an original Troma film
19 January 2023
Even though TROMA was still writing and producing their own movies in the 1980s, this isnt one of them and its why it has big name actors and actresses. Llyod is a cheap-skate three letter person, so he would NEVER pay for real actors, nor make a movie with this level of production value. Stella Stevens, Claude Atkins, out of his price range. Identifying young talent like Paul Walker and "Fergie" nope, the man has ZERO talent all the talent in that family went to his brother Charles, and NOT to Lloyd. Lloyd would never spend money on REAL actors (as he is known to regularly NOT pay those he does hire). Meaning, no real actor would waste their time on one of his "productions".

This is a film TROMA distributed by them in the USA in the 1980s, then bought and owned and released on DVD in the late 90s, which is ironically when TROMA stopped producing films that werent just complete garbage.

That said, what ruins this low budget gem is the creature. Just terrible, and while I know the entire movie is a parody based on bad monster films, I just wish they had designed a better looking and more believable ugly creature, but I guess that would ruin the parody if it didnt look like a man in a cheap rubber suit.

Anyways, its just too bad Troma owns this film, hopefully Kaufmann passes soon so Tromas video library can be sold to better film producers/distributors/etc.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Tales from the Crypt: Till Death Do We Part (1993)
Season 5, Episode 13
4/10
Mean-spirited, and not in the typical Crypt fashion.
31 July 2022
Warning: Spoilers
Ever since I first saw this upon airing I never liked the ending to this episode.

Kate Vernon comes across as too much of an innocent victim. In most Crypt episodes the victim usually gets their revenge, either coming back from the dead, or something happens to the victimizer and they get their comeuppance. In other Tales from the Crypt shows the "be careful what you wish for" comes into play but even then the endings are not as mean-spirited or unsatisfying.

Kate Vernons character works as a waitress at a very nice restaurant John Stamos seems to manage for his at least 30 years older mob boss. The twist is the mob boss is a woman at least 30 years his Senior and he's basically her gigolo. The visual is striking, its clear he doesnt belong with her, but with Vernon. (Kudos to the person who hired the talent.)

At one point during the episode Vernons character asks Stamos's if hes ready (to get out of town), because she says "she just wants to be with him." Clearly they are talking about running off together.

After they are discovered together she is humiliated, stripped, then in it looks like the flashbacks, which took place all episode long, are finally over and Stamos and Vernon will turn the tables on the thugs and the nasty mob boss, but then it is all presented in the last 15 seconds as a dream sequence. I used to think it was Vernons dream but after just re-watching it, as another poster noted, its Stamos' characters dream.

The Crypt Keeper tries to insinuate at the beginning of the episode she wanted "diamonds", trying to insinuate she was a gold digger, and we are shown a scene where Stamos gives her an expensive watch as a gift and she is unsurprisingly enamored by it, but even in this scene it seems clear greed is not her motivation.

In the end Stamos' cowardly character never gets the comeuppance antagonists in Crypt episodes receive, (Think: Yellow S3 Ep14) we only have a seemingly innocent victim.

4 stars for the victim, Kate Vernon acting well as a scared victim, in all her scantily clad glory.

Id like to have seen this episode without the twist ending, but without the ending you cannot call this a Tales from the Crypt episode, because it is atypical, which is probably why they left this to be the last episode aired in season 5.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Head Office (1985)
6/10
The 1st hour of this movie is hilarious...the rest is formulaic meh
23 January 2022
Warning: Spoilers
It captures the hectic, cutthroat world of Big Corporate, and the jokes keep coming, especially in the first 30-45 minutes, which covers Issel's entire first day on the job. Even as he is promoted from PR which involves taking complaints from upset feminists to angry whalers, all the way up to the absurd and hilarious Board Room meetings.

But like all comedies it suffers from a formulaic conclusion as the guy (Judge Reinhold) gets the girl (Lori Nan-Engler), in this instance the anti-Big Business activist girl whose father is, of course, the CEO of INC.

In the end we get formulaic triumph of good over evil as the father figure is forced to resign and all his stock handed over to activist daughter. This would never happen in a publicly traded company, but the formulaic framing of the plot needed its formulaic happy ending.

Do watch this movie for the first hour at least until as another commenter noted, Jane Seymour has her speech on ethics, the movie goes straight after her speech (she also disappears from the movie). The cameo bits of Rick Moranis, Danny Devito, (Even Don King) which are brief, are memorable and are part of why the first half of the movie is hilarious. The late Merrick Buttrick, Ron James, Bruce Wagner and Wallace Shawn are more great side characters who are introduced and forgotten about as the formulaic and messy conclusion unfolds. Props to Eddie Albert, he is great through-out the film

Sex: Jane Seymour looks good in white and pink lingerie, though we never see her in the black lingerie from the VHS box cover. Lori Nan-Engler briefly shows a cute behind in white panties. Brief Topless nudity at a Strip Club scene.

Violence: Lame shoot-out at end.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
British oral hygiene at its worst
25 December 2021
Bob Grant has mold/tar in teeth, and to make it worse, he has a giant toothy mouth.

Maybe back then standard definition film couldnt pick that up, but in remastered times, it is disgusting and off-putting, and completely ruins your suspension of disbelief, which is needed to enjoy any film.

I tried watching a Hustler horror film once, and being Hustler, the chicks were not the highest caliber; one of the girls had bad acne. You cant have acne on a hot babe, nor black, tar-ridden teeth on be a "cheeky playboy".

The fact he plays a cheeky character is beyond unbelievable. I cant believe a producer would let that disgusting mouth on screen, even back then.
0 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Dull as dishwater. Another bad Netflix film
8 November 2021
Warning: Spoilers
This is one of the worst "Heist" films I have ever seen.

It starts off promising with the safecracker from Army of the Dead loading a Youtube video, then beating his table lock in 8 seconds, however, with this scene, youve pretty much seen the ENTIRE movie...The suitor is then invited to what I can only describe as a safecracking version of a cockfight, where people bet on who finishes first and their are 3 rounds of safecracking, so of course our protagonist opens safes/vault doors 3 times, so thats is him sticking his ear against metal door and spinning a dial back and forth 3 times, all this before hes even been introduced to the "gang". By the time you have seen the first vault opened, even with the CGI of the inside mechanism changing, youve seen them all. The first vault, has 2 locks, the 2nd vault 3, and the 3rd vault 7.

There are stories behind the vaults, including about their creator, which is repeated more than once, but they are meaningless in moving the plot forward. None of the stories solve a mystery that makes the safes easier or more interesting to crack.

Our wet-behind the ears protagonist can stick his magic ears to the metal doors and break these locks, with their trillions of combinations and shut-out safety systems, with ease and in just mere minutes.

I havent even discussed how this somewhat interesting and off-beat side character from the weak Army of the Dead film cant carry this film and goes from funny to annoying real quick, neither can the rest of the heist crew carry this film. The INTERPOL agents are useless (Beatrix) and annoying (Guy shot in *ss) and the background Zombie apocalypse adds ZERO to the plot, no one seemed to care or were even worried about it.

The romance interest of the protagonist hates her rich parents and it's why she made the morally questionable choice to become a criminal. She goes out and steals from common people, including a ladies wedding ring, a mans gold watch, and she also thinks she should decide if an elderly man can carry a piece to protect himself. Meanwhile, this same hypocrite plans to rob vaults with tens of millions of "Euros" to the final vault having hundreds of millions, but dont worry folks, they just do it mostly for the "challenge", as they walk out of each dangerous heist with just 2, count it 2 bags of money per heist!!! First vault has 40 million in it, 2 bags. The last vault has 100 million, they have even taken the vault out to the middle of nowhere, yet still, just 2 bags.

I know what Im about to say may get this post deleted, but I read through the other reviews, and was dismayed at the number of 8, 9 and 10's this film received. Those kinds of ratings should be reserved for the best of the best; A Saving Private Ryan, Trials at Nuremburg, True Grit, or a Citizen Cane.

They should not be sullied with the same ratings as this Army of the Dead spin-off/rip-off. I weep for the past when IMDB reviews were intelligent and nuanced, and not inundated with Social Media obsessed narcissists who think Corporate Netflix with their Million dollar production budgets, their B-movie scripts and their C level directors, (this movie was NOT directed NOR written by Z. Snyder) produces GOOD films.
2 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Snake Eyes (2021)
6/10
ORIGINS STORY
21 August 2021
Its seems like the majority of User Reviews on this once great site for cinephiles, dont understand the definition of an ORIGINS STORY.

Honestly, Im not shocked by anything anymore, my country went from a Quota filling President, to a Celeb President, to one who is senile and starting to suffer from Dementia, all in a period of 5 years. Social media regularly outs many in our culture as entitled, ignorant, and entirely self-absorbed. I should have known better, reading all the reviews I thought the movie was going to be a major bomb, I mean Suicide Squad levels of cinematic malaise and incompetence.

Then I watched it and two things stood out, other than Samara Weaving, (Hugo Weavings niece) not to many Americants are going to recognize this Asian heavy cast, save for maybe Uko Uwias, which is great! A Yakuza movie SHOULD be set in Japan and have a majority Asian actors.

The second issue is at time the movie seems like an A- or B+ production, and that is going to upset the clueless, Social Media crowd, who think every rebooted hot property should have at minimum, $200 million dollar budgets, and a script that follows the Kevin Fiege way.

No thanks to corporate made "Happy Meal" movies, and while this isnt a top notch Hollywood production, I enjoyed this more way more than WW84 or the last 3 Marvel produced movies I've seen.
0 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Track 29 (1988)
8/10
Lavender symbolizes purity, silence, devotion, serenity, grace, and calmness
11 August 2021
Warning: Spoilers
The fact Linda Henry (Theresa Russell) wears this color exclusively through-out the film is why Im bumping this up to an 8. (her acting is really great in many scenes, then in some where a wonky southern accent is implemented, shes still decent.)

Also, the fact most of the reviewers didnt seem to figure out what was going on in this film is reason enough. To be fair, if I had seen this movie 20, or even 10 years ago I would have most likely been confused as well.

However, this movie gives us enough clues, like her talking like a child to her husband, or being pouty and agnry, along w/ her obsession with wearing lavender, as well as her husbands (Christopher Lloyd) train hobby obsession, his job, and his sexual fetish w/ a mistress, lets us know where its going, but it wont be a boring ride. Not to mention Gary Oldman and what happens when his character becomes a figment of her decreasing mental state, yet.

The complaint this is a movie we've seen before but just done differently, doesnt seem fair. Yes, we've seen this movie before, a woman, a victim of rape as a teen which ends in a pregnancy. The child is torn from her arms at birth, never to be seen from again. Yup, sounds EXACTLY like an early Lifetime movie, but thanks to Potters script and Roeg's direction it is much more than that.

After a chance encounter with her friend (Collen Camp) at a restaurant with a hitchhiker (the only time anyone who knows Linda sees Oldmans character w/ her before her fragmenting mental state begins) who reminds her of the man who knocked her up, which is originally portrayed as consensual sex act, but she starts to mentally crack, a full on hemorrhage occurs after her husband leaves to go to work the next morning after they have what we are told, another failed argument, as she wants a child of her own and he does not. The moment he leaves the house she has a complete nervous breakdown, the rest of the movie is her imaging having a relationship w/ said hitchhiker character who also reminds her of her rapist.

In my opinion, this is where the sexually charged scenes come from (she IS a neglected wife and Oldmans character reminds her of someone she had a child with) The scenes of Oldmans character acting like a child seems to be when she breaks from being sexual, as she is more tired and confused, as a mother would be, in those scenes. (Freud would have a field day with these scenes)

In one of the final scenes she is getting dressed but ignores one of the lavender dresses she had crumpled up on the bed, and instead wore a WHITE DRESS instead. If anyone reading this grew up in a Christian church, you know the symbolism of that color in that faith, as being "born again" acts as purge against former sins, making you "cleansed and without spot" as the Bible says.

So as Linda drives away from her past life the metaphor being shown us is she has cleansed herself of that unhappy life, and is ready to be born again with a new life.
3 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Game (1984)
2/10
Only watch if youre a Rebane completist.
17 July 2021
Warning: Spoilers
If there is such a thing. Also, only watch if you like multiple climaxes leading to a confusing conclusion.

As others have noted, even our Jack Palanced imitating narrator cant figure it out as he concludes the film for us. There "seems" to be a specter or ghostly presence, or is it all props and fog machines?

The 3 at the beginning talk about the year before "almost losing one" and how that would have been "embarrassing", but they lose a whole bunch of them here, Igor even tells the "cop" character to not go back and look for the others...so do they kill or not?

For instance, there are the 3 millionaires and their Igor-like helper, we know they survive or at least Igor does and they what, re-animate?

Then there is Jon, Joe and Karen, the 3 "survivors".

They are told to go back to a second hotel in town and their they will meet the rest of the players who lost, except their is only one person there, the male band member who was part of the couple. Everyone else is missing, which includes, J. D. Shelly, Aaron, Ronnie and Cindi.

Then the narrator kicks in, as cop Joe looks at Northernaire from a bridge, the narrator notes Maude, Horace and George are all alone now in the place, but then he asks, "Where are Shelly, Ron and Aaron?" Thats only 3 of the 5 missing people, I was actually sitting there wondering when I was watching all of this, was what happened to Cindi? We see her on the floor screaming at the fake hand puppet, and thats the last we ever see of her. We actually SEE and hear what happens to poor Shelly, or did it?

Im not someone who always need the ending spelled out for them, but for their to be multiple climaxes leading to a confusing conclusion that makes no sense, thats just egregious.

Ive seen a couple of other Rebane films, the decent Blood Harvest (starring Tiny Tim), and the lackluster and campy Twisters Revenge, (starring a Monster Truck) which actually takes Rebanes poor dialogue and grade-Z actors and ratchets it up. This films star seems to be the Northernaire Hotel, but at least their are characters you kind of care about, but dont.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Superdeep (2020)
6/10
Rubles exchanged this only had a 2 million dollar budget?
12 July 2021
Warning: Spoilers
That doesnt seem right, but lets say it is... So for 2 million this is a pretty well done film, but it gives away its low budget at times, this would have cost between $10-20 million if Hollywood had produced the film.

That said the tight budget shows through-out the film and not necessarily in the sets, the CGI, nor the practical effects, which are decent. It's the editing, dialogue, script(so many plot holes, so many "Why are you going in such and such a place, completely unprotected"? What ever happened to the clear as day, hes going to sabotage the mission, saboteur?) You can tell the director needs more experience behind the camera, and if this only cost 2 million, a much larger budget. (seriously, you can see the dolly which the creature is sitting on when it chases our scantily clad female lead.)

The acting, save from the aforementioned female lead, Milena Radulovic, who carries the film on her back, is pretty bad. The female lab tech they find left behind with the engineer, who is also weak in the acting dept., she may be the worst actor in this film and that's saying a lot. I understand I watched a "Dubbed" version, but the writing is way to simplistic and the dialogue is stilted, some of it may be "lost in translation", but it continues to pile up through the film, and along with the questionable editing, and a script that needed tightening up and polishing, it would have taken money which this films budget didnt have.

I have read through comments and this movie pulls from other movies. I personally didnt think of The Thing, which is a good comparison, but while watching I kept being reminded of Leviathan (1989). The creature from this movie is an exact replica, but instead of a underwater mining facility that stumbles on a sunken Russian ship w/ a genetically modified dead crew, its an underground research facility that finds a naturally occurring but life threatening phenomena. The Thing also had a similar creature and the setting was also in the Artic/Antarctic circle. The final scene(s) where the creature is chasing our lead through-out the halls of the facility reminded me of Ripley in Alien.

Our lead develops a love interest (a bit shoehorned in, but I digress) through this film, and in his final scene the make-up as he turns, which is done very well BTW, looks like a creature from the video game Last of Us or Doom.

According to IMDB movie had 15 minutes cut-off by the producers, so maybe it answers a few more questions, but the movie as it is, is still too long. This goes back to the original problem with the script. It needed to be tightened up, a few more experienced eyes needed to vet this films script, but alas.

Its worth a watch, the female lead carries the film and kind of makes up for the films shortcomings. If like me, you liked 2020's release of Underwater, (or ANY of the movies/video games compared to it in the User Reviews) you will like this film, but once again, its much lower budget and its foreign produced, so its raw and flawed.
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Dig (2021)
6/10
Potentially great historic film ruined by an agenda.
7 February 2021
And that agenda is writing a script that follows the new rules of what the Academy will consider for their pointless award show, which these days only crowns poor and corporate approved movies.

This film moves along swimmingly until the Piggots arrive. Clearly, all is not well, it looks like we have a marriage of convenience, if you get my drift. This subplot, becomes as important and as relevant as the actual excavation as well as Ediths and Basil story .

Even though right after the Piggots arrive most of the major treasures are found, its not enough as the script eschews the interesting historical dig which the movie is SUPPOSED to be about, for a romance subplot.

I actually realized as I watched the final long scene play out, that they had not even bothered to mention in the movie if a body had been found, or if they had done any digging of the other mounds. You will find more of that information HERE on IMDB trivia page, then in the movie.

The movie ALREADY had characters you could care about in Edith, Basil, Robert, and the fictional Rory character, but to try and shoe-horn in the ole romance story on the eve of war trope, all in order to be considered for the Oscars, absolutely ruins the movie.

This could have been a LOT better, Ralph Fiennes is nearly wasted here as he become a secondary character, once again AFTER the Piggots show up.

This is NOT Oscar material, but then again, if you had told me 2 minutes after watching Parasite that it would later win best picture I wouldnt have believed you.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Lady Avenger (1988)
2/10
Awful David DeCoteau film
13 December 2020
Warning: Spoilers
Most of his films are low budget sex films, but in the late 80s he did low budget sex-horror, before the genre died out in the 90s and he did mostly sex movies and sex comedies, etc. This movie is an action flick, wedged between 2 of his "better" films, "Sorority Babes in the Slimeball Bowl-a-Rama" and "Nightmare Sisters", where Michelle Bauer works with him again. Dr. Alien and Creepozoids were also made around this time, though I think Creepoziods is one of the worst low budget movies ever made. It does have one loan bright spot, which is also why Nightmare Sisters is so well known, LeAnna Quigley. Michelle Bauer also joins in that cult classic film as well. Speaking of Ms. Bauer, the 80's scream queen is the ONLY reason to watch this flick. Yes, the main lead Peggy McIntaggart is easy on the eyes and athletic enough for the action scenes and the wielding of a gun, but she is a TERRIBLE actress, completely unconvincing not only when she has to deliver a line, but even worse in reaction and still scenes.

Someone mentioned this in their review, but the movie at one point has a car chase scene that ends in a fiery wreck. It is one of the worst shot crashes in the history of cinema because even in movies, NO ONE WOULD HAVE survived. Its got great pyrotechnics but its a complete overkill. The car she is in is literally bursts into fire, yet she is able to escape with no wounds or burns, just a tiny hole in the windshield and some black ash on her face...she has a BF of sorts in the front seat during all of this, but he disappears after the wreck happens and isnt accounted for at all, she and the movie literally forgets about him...until maybe later in the film. (Ill be honest, I started fast forwarding after this) It gets worse when you see that the pursuers, who saw their SUV turn upside down after the wreck and then even blow-up, they were all unscathed (they even yell at her OFF SCREEN about how its not over) They of course return later to kill someone laid up in a hospital they once had a chance to kill, but only sexually assaulted and maimed the victim, thus putting the victim into a coma, they then GO BACK to the hospital, where the victim isnt guarded and kill her. WHY kill someone in a medically induced coma in a hospital when they could have killed her the first time but decided not too? Because the script needed it to happen so they could pad out the time and so the lead could even get more "revenge".

This movie was an attempt by DeCoteau to make a straight action-revenge flick with a female lead, but it horrendous like the acting from most of the other actors in this film. Except for Michelle Bauer you wont recognize anyone.
1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
How I have never seen this movie before?
28 November 2020
This is the kind of 80s comedy in the same vein as many 80s farcical comedies. OKeefe plays his part like he did in Caddyshack, Beverly D'Angelos plays a very spunky, mouthy blonde, opposite of the mother character in all the Vacation movies, but she still cute and adorable. Louis Gossett Jr shows up halfway through the movie and is there to the end.

The story, set around 1972, isnt bad, it moves along and is never boring. There are some funny scenes and some funny dialogue. However the utterly farcical and slapstick type ending kinda ruins the movie, somehow we are supposed to believe Louis Gosset Jrs character doesnt know where the brake peddle is, but hey, its a comedy its needs a light hearted end to this "crime" story.

Ive been a mission to watch as many "bad" movies as I can, and found a site dedicated to forgotten movies, good or bad. This was one of them, but I didnt think it was bad at all. However, looking through all the reviews, people are fiercely divided, they seem to love it or hate it, and in the end, maybe their were more haters in the critics circle and by whomever distributed it. CBS owned (owns) it, so Im surprised I never caught this on a Saturday or Sunday afternoon when TVs were still built with tubes.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
A student film without the film school.
15 April 2020
Warning: Spoilers
This amatuer film seems to be a small towns labor of love. You can tell by the sheer number of characters who pop in and out of this movie, that people were promised small roles if they did such and such. While the story is fresh in the fact instead of Bigfoot being portrayed as a mystery or fantasy, or a character in a horror film tearing people limb from limb, this film asks, what if Bigfoot was a perv?

Thats this film in a nutshell, the first 40 minutes has some of the best young topless nudity America has to offer, and then there is a complete tonal shift from frolicking topless girls in the water running away from Bigfoot, to a search for the answers, as a sheriff, father & son hunters, a news reporter working for a publication of some sort, a TV reporter, and SPOILER ALERT, ANOTHER posse of hunters who eventually find Bigfoot.

After the movie spends time setting up the camping scenes of the wayward topless girls; they introduce these characters by starting from a youth detention center, then go from there, they set-up camp, build a fire, tell stories and go to bed. They share tents and one couple have a lesbian encounter that has some of the worst edited in moaning you will ever hear. They wake-up and go swimming, and except for the prude character, they get topless. Then they have a run in with the leering Bigfoot and run away. It edited where you see them run past the father & son hunter, which is the last you see of those girl and the 2 women watching them. The they throw in an overly long useless side story of a 4-wheeling redneck and his chubby gf who have camp out and also encounter w/ Bigfoot. There are multiple useless side scenes. There is a scene where a fat old woman and old wimpy man who are also camping are scared off by Bigfoot, it sets up a comedic scene of Bigfoot trying to get the cap off the bottle, while hes doing that 2 other random hot girls you never see again in the movie happen by and try to add more to make the scene as they point and wonder at what they are seeing. The scene isnt funny, and its introduces 4 more useless characters you never see again.

The acting is pretty bad through-out, the story meanders and introduces many characters who are not necessary. Take for instance the Father & Son hunting duo, good writing would have them find Bigfoot, instead at the end the earlier drunken posse finds him, in the end the characters had no point. This is repeated throughout the film, useless characters are introduced and then discarded. To much of this film is just a collection of scenes weakly tied together or not at all.

The story isnt the worst of this movies problems, the camera work is terrible, the directing is awful a lot of the acting is terrible as well. Lots of dialogue is cringe.

The movie is lazy too. There is a scene early on where the topless girls are running back to the campground, when they get their prude girl and the 2 other female characters are in the scene, the girls run into the scene, the one girl gets in position but the 2&3 girl dont, the #2 girl ends up stepping back and around girl #3 to get into position. Listen, if this was the 1980s and you were using EXPENSIVE, REAL film, Id understand not re-shooting the scene, but my goodness, its the digital age! How hard would it have been to cut scene, erase it and redo the scene, making sure this time the girls knew their positions?

This movie is the problem with low budget filmmaking in the 2000's, people are lazy and not proud of a good, final product. If IMDB gave half stars Id give it 2.5 for the comedic "twist" of an ending, but even it seems like padding for another character. The movie does take a fun, 80s sex comedy style look at a worn-out genre, and its done with lots of heart and its not completely boring.

However, the story is only one of its problems as its amatuer hour with the acting, the directing, camerawork, the editing, etc. Honestly, if this is the kind of film you're looking for there are worse low budget options to waste an hour and 25 minutes of your time.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
5 stars
26 February 2020
Decent acting by the two leads. Ana De Armas (War Dogs, Blade Runner 2024, Knock-Knock) is beautiful and talented and Tye Sheridan, (Ready Player One, X-men) does a decent, but not great job as someone suffering from Aspergers.

Unfortunately the story is a bit preposterous. I don't understand why someone suffering from a crippling social malady would want to work in the service industry in the first place, but I digress. The script is mediocre and so is the directing. The editing in this movie is pretty bad.
0 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Night Hunter (2018)
4/10
Terrible editing. HUGE plotholes. Uneeded characters
18 August 2019
Warning: Spoilers
I agree with the OP on front page. This movie needed fewer big name actors, and better work done behind the screen.

The writing is somewhat original, but poor. The results of public education no doubt. This movie moves away from the, find the last girl so she doesnt die, that movies like The Cell, did infinitely better, yet this movie still managed to pigeon hole the ONLY 2 females characters at the end, as if we didnt see that coming. Also, the one girl who was simply NOT needed except to provide the writer/directors view of cops, and to make her the not once, but TWICE in the same movie, kidnapping victim!

The editing is terrible here, pointless scenes, scenes that dont transition well to the next scene, scenes to long, to short, you name it.

Even the big name actors couldnt save this poorly directed film, though they tried.
11 out of 20 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Based on an anime show
15 April 2019
Its basically soft core porn.

So dont bother think your getting a drama, its soft core Japanese style.
5 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Toybox (2018)
2/10
Horrible to the last drop...of fuel
12 February 2019
Warning: Spoilers
There isnt much I can add that hasnt been said by other viewers. This is one of the movies that is so bad, just reading the reviews afterwards makes the movie even worse.

This movie is so preposterous I completely forgot about the dog!

It bolted out the door the moment the RV came to a rest and we never saw it again, it was never even mentioned, it was just forgotten, like each victim was forgotten 15 minutes after their death.

There is one scene, that just explains how poorly written, directed and the overall execution of the movie is.

shortly after the RV breaks down in the middle of pretty much a desert, Bartons character is pretending to work on the engine right after the Grandfather nearly losses his arm in the engine... So the Father character exits the RV and veers to his right and approaches his brother who is sitting in a lawn chair parallel to the back bumper of the RV, but about 10 yards away from the RV and asks, I KID YOU NOT, "Where is Samantha?" (I remind you he just left an RV with more windows then the Sears Tower, and they are in a desert)! The brother points to the front of the RV. The completely useless Scene ends!

The next scene he is walking up to Mischa Bartons character who is still working at the front of the RV, and 10 feet behind her, his wife and daughter, just standing there. Seriously though, where else could they have been, they are in the middle of the desert! He could have just as easily exited the vehicle, did a lap around it and found them a lot easier then it actually was, due to a completely unnecessary and pointless scene. Add poor editing to the poor directing, storyline, acting, etc.

Denise Richards and Mischa Barton were brought in to give this name recognition. They are the only characters who can act worth a darn, all the male characters look and act like they just started taking acting classes. Speaking of Denise Richards and acting classes, she needs to take some, as her days of relying on her youthful beauty are over.

The serial killer is awful as well, the finale with Mischa Barton is laughably bad.

I pride myself in "almost never" rating a movie one, even a zero budget horrendous student film with no redeeming qualities probably wont earn a "1", due to what they are... but I gave serious thought to giving this film with a budget a "1", it is that level of awful.

Did I mention they kill a kid? You see it a mile coming as she avoided tragedy two times earlier, but the 3rd time, "was the charm".

Truly one to avoid.
4 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Future World (2018)
2/10
Makes the Bad Batch look like a cult masterpiece
2 July 2018
Franco and the other 18 producers attempt to rip-off Mad Max is an utter disaster

A Grade actors + B Grade production = C Grade result

PS Tons of killing and deaths, not one iota of sexual violence. Which is kind of hard to believe in a dystopian world with gangs of male bikers riding around everywhere, and a town built on drug addicts...there is no cannibalism either and no one gets thirsty...my point is this movie is boring and cliche with nothing new to offer.
1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Pyramid (2014)
4/10
Laughably bad CGI
27 March 2018
Warning: Spoilers
Its like the producers saw what they Director had done, and decided to cut their losses...

One of the plot devices they use to propel the story is the fact their is political upheaval going on in the same area as this discovery, which shortens the window for our explorers. The show this by showing a typical MiddleEast/Egyptian town from above. They then added about 4 black wisps of acrid CGI smoke in random spots as evidence of that political upheaval. The problem is it is some of the worst smoke CGI you will ever see, and it only gets worse at the end when Ra or whomever the Egyptian God, is revealed. If you thought that black smoke CGI looked fake, wait till you get a load of Ra.

I was hoping from the pantie peek at the beginning wed see more of Hinshaw, and maybe her UK actor bf for the ladies, but this movie is neither fun nor sexy and wastes the young nubile actors. It shrouds them in darkness, with Hinshaw unattractively whining throughout the movie like a spoiled brat.

In the end, you dont even care they all get their come-uppance, as lazy writing and odd camera work that is one moment found footage, and the next an angle on a cameraman would take that shot from....just a mess of a movie and I think the producers knew it before the movie was even finished
0 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Josie (2018)
4/10
Decent film up until the terrible ending.
27 March 2018
Warning: Spoilers
McDermotts acting is great in this, but I digress.

A few days before I watched this film, I tried had an argument on social media over what I view as Americans lacking ethics and a strong moral base.

This movie is a classic example of that. Im sorry, but Josie taking out her Fathers murderous wishes in revenge, makes her no better than anyone else, in fact, she is the one who needs locked up and the needle stuck in her arm.

Let me put it to you this way, Josie blaming prison guards for her innocent father being put to death, is like being mad at the police for enforcing the law. Example: Should cops be stomping all over poeples rights, seizing their cash and property, arresting them and throwing them in jail all because of a little pot? A vast majority of Americans think No, but our out of touch, Oligarchs in Washington DC, dont care what we want, so they have the police do their "dirty work".

My point is, the protagonist in this movie is a moron who thinks that the people to blame for her Father being put to death are the SECURITY GUARDS at the prison, and not the politicians, scumbag lawyers, judges, and people in power who railroaded her Father.

To add to the sheer absurdity that she would even get away with this, is the back-handed insults at the expense of Texas was unnecessary and just more Hollywood bigotry towards red states, which the hateful Hollywood bigots want seen as normalized. Maybe Hollywood should try treating people they look down on, like woman for instance, with respect.
23 out of 49 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Confusing mystery based on a short story
21 March 2018
Warning: Spoilers
I watched this movie with subtitles, and even if they were the most poorly translated subs in the history of the world, which they weren't, they couldnt be to blame for a mystery film that never bothers to explain much, nor does it answer any of the questions raised. The movie is engrossing, even if it moves a bit slow and some scenes are padded out.

A poster above explains it as if we are seeing it through the protagonists eyes, and we are just as confused as he is...Ok, then why on the last day, Day 5, when he sees the older gentleman pulling his wife into the elevator, why does the movie not show us what he sees when he gets back to the room and finds his wife? Especially considering the old man detours him and shows him something that hints at something darker....Scenes like this hit dead end to frequently(like the 2 separate convos our protagonist had with the restaurant owner, we learn a small crumb of info each time, but then he just goes off about Lion King's and girls tights verses nylons) easy explanations are not made between characters, questions are not asked, which just further confounds the viewer.

The movie does a poor job of explaining the couple times when he dreams, or is it when he writes, verses reality...all of which just adds to the confusion.

The most egregious issue of all is ZERO questions are answered about the young lady, countless ones are raised, but not a single answer! Im not even 100% sure what happened to her, though a couple scenes hint strongly her demise, but due to the confusion of when he is dreaming/writing, and the fact no one ever answers any of his questions, nor does he explain to anyone what he knows to get a dialogue going...so in the end their are almost no reveals. Does this sound like your kind of mystery/thriller?

It was maddening...there was a point in the movie where maybe I thought he was just making this all up, like he was writing the movie into existence ala that John Candy movie from the 80's.

Let me put it this way, since IMDB got rid of the message boards, I havent posted one article, but this movie got me to post. Ive seen hundreds of movies since that fateful day, most I would give ratings equal or lower to this movie, but the lack of answers and the utter frustration I feel made me want to warn everyone about what they were about to invest their time into. Its engrossing and interesting but without a true conclusion, it felt like wasted time.
4 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Water Wars (2014)
1/10
What a Turd Sandwich
29 January 2017
Warning: Spoilers
You know its going to be a bad film when right off the bat, you are presented with some stock footage from some failed, wannabe Mad Max film.

Which continues through-out the movie all the way till the unsatisfying climax.

So what you have are grainy, looks like it was shot on film in the 80's scenes intermixed with new scenes shot with HD cameras. Its obvious they are two separate films being mashed together to make one.

The acting is abysmal, our hero is some old, fat Billy Ray Cyrus look alike who is to our horror given a sex scene in what is one of the ugliest sex scenes ever filmed for a non-porno film. The, cant act to save her life Playmate, cant save the scene from being a disaster either.

Neither can the random topless scenes strewn through-out this movie.

Speaking of the best topless scene, it was from the stock footage, they probably should have left her character out, but it is obvious Jim Wynorski didn't want those scenes to "go to waste", but it only serves to further confuse the movie as this character plays a martyr in the movie, but her role is way to small, letting you know that she played a bigger role in the original script of the stock footage movie.

I'd say that Quentin Tarantino maybe owes Michael Madsen an apology for not hiring him lately, because Madsen has been going down the Eric Roberts path lately. Plus, there is no way Madsen could have known the original director, Ciro Santiago, would get sick after a few days of filming, and have to be replaced with Jim Wynorski.

That said this movie is deserving of the 1 star I just gave it. I rarely do such a thing, even terrible independent student films get at least a 2 for the effort, but this movie is directed by people who have had long careers making movies, its sheer awfulness is inexcusable.
2 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Knock Knock (I) (2015)
3/10
This is basically a remake of Death Game
12 January 2017
Warning: Spoilers
Unfortunately, it would have been wiser to spend the money digitally remastering that movie then what we have here.

Which is a disaster.

When I read about this movie in 2015 with Reeves starring as the protagonist, my initial instinct was to stay away, my instincts were right. Unfortunately, my instincts were overcome by my discovery of Ana de Armas, after seeing her in War Dogs & Blind Alley, my desire to see more of her overcame my better instincts...WE do see for a few moments MORE of her so there is that...lol

Keanu Reeves is completely out of his element here. The scenes with his family are awkward and cringe inducing, it doesn't help the dialogue in the Family scenes are awful. I can applaud him for wanting to take on a different role. (he had to Executive Produce to get that role) I fully believe he took this role knowing that it was different then anything he had done, as in this movie hes not the strong hero, hes the weak victim, so fans of Reeves are going to hate how weak his character is as well as the original ending.

The dialogue in this movie is so bad. Reeves and Roths Girlfriend deliver them so badly, like I said before, "cringe inducing".

Eli Roth has lost his exploitative touch.

Im watching Death Game as I type this and while the camera work in the remake is MUCH better, and the shower scene is 10x better, the tension isn't there because Roth toned his movie down. Death Game is a much better Exploitation movie during a pre-PC time when they did exploitation movies MUCH BETTER. The girls are much bigger psycho's, and they are a lot sexier as they do it! Roth in turns seems to be afraid to show much skin and had them overdressed after the threesome.

In Death Game they literally kill someone by beating his skull in! Collen Camp and SOndre Locke weren't tiny little teenagers either, it was simply more believable they could overpower their victim together. They were also not shy and there is a dress up scene where they tease their tied up victim...ELi Roth had two sexy girls and only one of them played sexy psycho well enough. (HINT IT Wasn't his GIRLFRIEND!) Also, Roth decides to have the one victim die "ambiguously", which lets the girls off the hook, so to speak, in what I think was a failed, secondary plot line to show they did this somewhat routinely and/or lead into the now defunct alternate ending. Either way it was a WEAK death scene.

Death Games shows the girls as true blue psychos while Knock-Knock gives off a more PG-13, misandry vibe, albeit with a much more memorable ending...I take that back I just saw it and in Death Games, the ending IS better! SPOILER ALERT!!!! They have the girls right after leaving get hit by an SPCA van, they had killed his cat earlier in the movie! Man, Death Game even did the camp better then Knock Knock!

Something tells me that "Alternate Ending" in Knock, Knock was supposed to be in the original movie, whether as the original ending(Doubtful) or as an End Credits Scene (more likely IMO.) It also shows the girls as bigger psycho's as you see them torturing another man, but now they have switched roles, clothing, hair etc. It also lets you know John Wick gets his revenge.

Instead Roth went with the Very Bad Things ending, except not funny, just horrifying. Too bad it took so long, and was such an uncomfortable and cringe inducing ride, just to get there.
0 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Good effort, but ultimately fails.
22 June 2015
If you think you are getting an action movie you will be sorely mistaken, due to obvious budget implications this movie is more like a drama....or a "war soap opera".

Where the film is shot is not convincing, I don't feel like Im traveling through 1940s Europe, but some American forest.

The writing shows a true lack of understanding of what WW2 conflict was about, or the military in general and thusly the actors are not to able to portray this film accurately enough for the time period. The movie also rambles on in scenes, since the budget is low, and action scenes scarce, they try to write in scenes with supposedly deep, profound conversations but its just boring and cheesy.

Even the scenes of tension are lame, like the soldier hiding behind a door he would obviously have been seen by anyone, heck a 2 year old would have found him.

Then there is a scene where they just let some German soldiers go, (of course the decision comes back to haunt them) its completely unbelievable and lame you can tell the writer of this movie, never spent a day in the military, neither did the Director or any of the Producers.

BTW, there were like 3 pages of posts talking about how great this movies was 2 weeks ago, but it looks like IMDb dumped them all, I knew it was to good to be true, and when I turned the movie on, I was like yup, knew it...thank goodness it was a torrent!
22 out of 40 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Black Sea (2014)
5/10
One of the worst of the Sub genre...Some spoilers ahead
25 April 2015
Im a huge fan of the Submarine Genre, I even thought Below was a great film. So when I found this I was pumped, but then I started watching it...color me disappointed.

First, the movie attacks Businesses, Corporations, IE: Capitalism. Its one of those movies where they make some faceless, nameless Corporation the bad guy. Well, that doesn't work in this movie and it doesn't really work for most American audiences. America is a Capitalist country, Europe, where this movie was made, is full of Socialists. So thats one downfall the movie has as the Corp. and its goals, which we learn via the corporate stooge, make absolutely no sense at all, but thats how they chose to move the plot along.

Secondly, except for the kid and the corporate stooge, these are all experienced, professional submariners, yet almost none of them act like it. Being in a sub is the epitome of trusting others, yet a majority of these people act like they are in a building and can just walk out of it if/when the sh*t hits the fan. Jude Law plays the captain but hes one of the weakest captains on film, no one seems to respect him and no one but the kid wants to follow him.

Which is why the whole plot stinks and is so wooden, these men aren't criminals, they are all sailors/submariners, but most of them act like paranoid criminals from the time they get in the sub. Many actions characters take are detrimental to their well being and the success of the "mission", to the point it makes you shake your head at the lack of believability.

Also, for the submariners out there, how many times can a sub crash into the ocean floor? I know the first time it crashed on to the corral reef, but nevertheless, this old rusting submarine survived two crashes and 2 explosions that happened inside it, yet it only sprung a leak at the very end with the last explosion.

Oh, and that kid took a pressure plate blow-out to the face, and then gets up like nothing happened. In real life it would have killed him.

The "Leviathan" like ending probably wouldn't work in real life either, as they were on the ocean floor, they wouldn't be able to decompress in that way...and last but not least, Gold doesn't float.

I don't think the switching out of shafts would have worked in real life either, it made a nice sub-plot, but the shaft being the same fit was the least of this movies problems.
9 out of 17 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An error has occured. Please try again.

Recently Viewed