|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
#8462
05-07-2006, 02:35 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
not a scratch on kirk's hk crime movies 
|
|
#8463
05-07-2006, 02:37 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Mission: Impossible III- 3/5
Usually, when you get to the third entry in a series (or trilogy, depending on if it gets a fourth installment), the movies start to lack. There are a lot of examples. Such as American Wedding, Friday the 13th part 3, Night of the Demons 3, etc. Sure, they don't always ruin the series (look at part 3 in the Friday the 13th franchise). But, this is where the movies start to lack anything new or interesting. I'm glad to say that this can not be said about MI3. Now, MI3 isn't the greatest movie ever made. Nor did it have the intention of being that. All it tried to accomplish is to entertain it's audience. And it did that. Well, somewhat. Sure, the film didn't do what I thought it would do, that being gunshots and explosions for pretty much 2 hours straight (the film clocks in at 2 hours and 6 minutes). It did what action flicks should do. Have gunshots and explosions and what not, but still have a storyline so the action doesn't feel repetitive or redundant. You also have to have a good storyline (which MI3's storyline was only sub-par), or you'll just bore the hell out of your audience. I did like the use of the supporting roles in the film, but not all of them were used to the fullest. A fine as wine example would be Philip Seymour Hoffman. He plays Owen Davian, the main villian in the film (obviously). But, he wasn't used that much. He only appeared to either piss off Ethan Hunt or be apart of one of IMF's dangerous and, at times, tacky plans (such as when they make a mask of Davian and have Hunt where it to knock out Davian, retrieve his voice, then pretend to be him). Which leaves me with two unanswered questions: Why would you only use your main villian for such a limited amount of time and why would you only use and Academy-Award winning actor for such a limited amount of time? Well, I doubt I'll get an answer to these questions. I did like Simon Pegg's (he played Shaun in Shaun of the Dead) cameo as Benji Dunn, one of the workers at IMF (I think, but am not totally sure, that he is a scientist). That's a real treat to any horror fan or fan of Shaun of the Dead. Overall, MI3 was an enjoyable, but exceptional, sequel that slightly surpassed MI2.
__________________
 Quote:
|
|
#8464
05-07-2006, 04:10 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Mortuary
After viewing this film, I came to a great realization, an epiphany if you will: Tobe Hooper is a fucking hack. He made one great film thirty years ago and hasn't been able to produce anything worth a damn since (with the possible exception of Toolbox Murders). A one trick pony in the truest sense of the word, his popularity is unfathomable. Oh, and Mortuary is awful. Don't watch unless you're drinking with buddies and looking for some MST material. Final note: the years have not been kind to Denise Crosby. Overall: 1/10.
__________________
And no matter what I say I cannot resist or betray it. No one could do so because there is no one here. There is only this body, this shadow, this darkness.
|
|
#8465
05-07-2006, 05:28 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Return of the Living Dead; ****/*****
SCARE FACTOR: 5/5 Ok, so if you don't already know... since most movies aren't SCARY, persay, I also count atmosphere and twists into this category. It gets a 5 because it's the perfect film to watch with some friends on Halloween night. It was the rainy, pitch black night setting, the graveyard, the zombies, and everything. Definately a good one. Oh, and for scares - while the paramedic is radioing in for more help... a zombie jumps into the passengers seat. I was expecting it to be his buddy, but it wasn't and it moved so fast and sudden and just attacked. I found that to be if even a little scary. Just the way it moved. Y'know? COMEDY FACTOR: 4/5 It was rather funny, hehe, I enjoyed it immensly. Not as funny as... say, Evil Dead, but it was pretty damn hillarious nonetheless. I loved how it made fun of the US army too, subtle humour like that. No need to be in your face and retarded such as... say, Scary Movie. BLOOD & GORE: 3.5/5 It is a zombie movie after all. It has some good looking zombies, but their faces look rather comedic. Like that "black thing" in the basement. There were some nasty scenes with some brain munching that looked rather good, as well as a few other little things here and there. NUDITY & TA: 4/5 I'll give it a 4 because of the strip & dance scene, plus her later reappearence as a zombie. It showed all of her, which I was suprised to see. Didn't expect it to go below the waist, or at least for her to keep her panties on. It wasn't nudity all the time, nor did it feature any male skin, so no 5 for it. --- Ah... the 80's. You gotta love 'em. This was a fun little romp in the horror/comedy genre. I must say I was expecting more of an Evil Dead style to it, but I found this just as enjoyable. It certainly was fun, and I can only wish that movies now of days were like this. Rather then Scary Movie with it's plain out retarded humour, and recycled collage laughs. I found this more subtle, smart humour to be more satisfying, on a large scale. Currently it stands a close second with Evil Dead 2 as my favourite horror comedy of all-time. Of course, I haven't seen many... and should invest in a few Troma videos sometime in the near future (next week's marathon, perhaps?). What bothers me about most zombie films is the logic behind them. Zombies eat brains... why? Why not just meat? And how exactly do skeletons move on their own without any muscles or organs? Zombies only die when their brain is severed. I can see why that happens. In my perspective, zombie films should take this into heart. A zombie is technically something brought back from the dead. Reanimated. It is simply a vessel, however decayed and destoryed, that still has it's important organs. The reanimation is simply a shock that gives it more life, another chance. It makes the organs go once again, and powers the brain if only a little. Allowing movement, thoughts, and all the things a normal human can do. Now it will be flawed because it's body is weathered, and shooting it and letting it die from bloodloss won't make it die. Instead, the organs must be destoryed. The heart, the brain... and for inmobility, the muscles. If you remove the muscles, the zombie should not be able to move - yet still be alive, and if you destory the heart, it will not be able to function. That's my gripse, realism.My way is not perfect at all either, but better then what was seen in this film. I'm not holding any of this against it, however, because that would just be wrong... lol. I was glad - however - to find a redeeming point in this. The lady on the stretcher, severed at the waist. She was human, and she explained why she ate brains. I found that moment to bea highlight, it gave it human emotions - I was actually sad for it, I felt something for the zombies instead of just... hate and disgust. They, after all, are people too. Why would they want to attack others and eat them? Well, this answered it. To stop the pain. Oh, and something just like The Omen. The music. A+! Loving those 80's grooves. They gave the scenes a certain... class to them. I don't know why. Perhaps it just had that effect when watching the film today, because of the age, and might have been seen as just typical soundtrack pieces when originally released. Hell, who cares. In all cases, this film has definately NOT lost it's touch over time. Perhaps it's even better now, because of it's age. Mmhm!
|
|
#8466
05-07-2006, 05:35 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
__________________
 Quote:
None of this is real
|
|
#8467
05-07-2006, 06:01 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Spy Game
This one was a big surprise for me. Im usually not a fan of espionage films, nor am I usually a fan of Brad Pitt. This movie was a pleasant surprise on both counts, and I really enjoyed it. The plot is very good for a big-budget Hollywood movie, I was interested from beginning to end. All the performances are great, and every character is unique. You almost feel sorry for some characters, while others are there simply for comic relief. No matter which they may be, everyone involved succeeds at their purpose. I really like Redford's character...it wasnt really anything new for him, but he was still funny and just plain cool. The director handled the plot very well; it's not very hard to figure out, but he still finds ways to keep you interested and wondering if your assumptions are correct. I definatly recomend this one. 8/10
__________________
"There is always some madness in love. But there is also always some reason in madness." - Friedrich Nietzsche
|
|
#8469
05-07-2006, 10:33 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Aeon Flux
Eh... This movie was pretty lame. The FX were alright, but not as eye popping as I had imagined and the story/plot was virtually nonexistent. There was decent action, but I have a hard time buying Charlize Theron as a super tough secret agent type of character. All in all, I thought this one pretty much sucked. If you decide to skip it, you won't be missing much. C-
__________________
Click for bwind22's 1 Minute Movie Reviews!
|
|
#8470
05-07-2006, 10:41 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Thelma & Louise Cool World Kalifornia True Romance Interview with the Vampire Legends of the Fall Se7en 12 Monkeys Sleepers Fight Club Snatch The Mexican Spy Game Confessions of a Dangerous Mind Troy Oceans 11 Oceans 12 Mr & Mrs. Smith He's also made tv appearances on 'Freddy's Nightmares', Takes from the Crypt, Growing Pains & King of the Hill. Plus, he's got all these movies coming out in the next couple years that sound cool too. The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford Oceans 13 Dallas Buyers Club Chad Schmidt That's a pretty impressive resume. How can you not typically like him? I think he generally picks awesome movies.
__________________
Click for bwind22's 1 Minute Movie Reviews!
|
 |
|
|
