Change Your Image
NightOfTheLivingDon
Reviews
Cabin Fever (2002)
Well, the title was appropriate in the fact that the film succeeded in making me ill.
When I was in college, I never had much money (surprise, surprise). Therefore, I rarely got to the theater during my stint. One film that I really wanted to see was Eli Roth's debut CABIN FEVER. From what I was reading, and a new friend's recommendation, the movie seemed to be right up my alley. I am a consummate fan of horror films, and the promise of a new movie that stayed true to old school roots sounded like something I had to see.
LIES!! Instead of seeing the supposed return to the heyday of horror, I was treated to a sloppy hodgepodge of influences. This wasn't some disciple of the old school come to save the horror film; it was the same insipid nonsense that killed it off in the first place. Roth's grasp of storytelling is about as strong as Britney Spears' grip on reality. Half of the movie was a display of just how many horror movies Roth has seen. "Yes, we get it Eli. You're a horror dork. Welcome to the club." The biggest problem Roth seems to have when attempting to deliver a horror movie is investing interest. Let's take the five main characters of CABIN FEVER. Five selfish, boring, and painfully typical college kids of whom I could not bring myself to emotionally invest in to any degree. I wasn't compelled to feel for the characters at all. Now, I get why they were like that. It's because we, the audience, are supposed to revel at their demises. The problem with the whole thing is, I for one, didn't care what happened to them in the first place. The end reaction is simply, "Good they're dead. You could have just told me that, and I would have been just as happy." The film was trite, and the gore wasn't even that great. The characters are simply annoying. They are not completely disdainful like the Stillo Gang, nor do they possess the strange charm of the Firefly Family (both gangs, and the films they appear in, are mentioned numerous times in numerous reviews). And where's this humor I keep on hearing about? I'll be the first to admit a few moments, but to go ahead and call the movie "funny?" That's a stretch. Turning the faceless killer/monster into a flesh eating virus did not add any kind of bonus suspense or intrigue. If anything, it reduced the little interest I had to begin with. There wasn't even a good ol' satifyin' kill, because, let's face it, killin' rednecks is old hat. Of course, Roth would try to make up for this with his next film HOSTEL and simply succeed in making a snuff film intended to be an homage to CANNIBAL HOLOCAUST. He just forgot that CANNIBAL HOLOCAUST had much more of a plot than selfish, boring, and painfully typical college kids backpacking across Europe. Do you see a trend here, because I sure do...
Okay, I'll give the devil his dues. There were a couple of scenes near the end that I enjoyed. The deer coming through the windshield and the kid getting the harmonica smacked down his throat were pretty good. I have to concede that those two scenes were ridiculous enough to put a long overdue smile on my face. However, they came far too late in the film to come close to saving it.
Oh, and I later found out that the friend of mine who recommended the film to me actually has no real taste in horror films. His favorite movie is THE RING, he won't watch any film that is black and white (even SCHINDLER'S LIST), and he thought that the original DAWN OF THE DEAD sucked even before he saw the remake (which he liked, of course). Good guy other than his lack of knowledge as to what a good film is. He's a bells and whistles kind of guy, though he does love THE WARRIORS so he's not all bad.
Hopefully, the insufferability of HOSTEL: PART 2 will either A) stop Eli Roth from torturing us with his films, or B) make Eli Roth reevaluate what he believes makes a good film. I hear he is in line to butcher a Stephen King movie, because he already wants to change the pace of the story. You know, because Eli Roth has such a better grasp on characters and plot than Stephen King. Roth's obsession with violence has done nothing more than terrorize his audience with mindless slop. I don't know what's worse, the fact that he gets away with it, or the fact that most modern horror fans let him!
City in Panic (1986)
M for Mundane
I can't believe I'm going to do this, but I HAVE to write a comment for probably the worst movie I have ever seen. Don't get me wrong, I love trashy movies. However, CITY IN PANIC is just trash. I mean that in the most literal of senses. I found this VHS in a heap of trash while doing my annual "End of the Year Dorm Dumpster Dive." See, at my alma marta, the end to every hallway would be FULL of junk that residents would leave behind after the school year was over. A couple of friends and I would always peruse the mess for some hidden gems. Mostly it was all junk, but every once in a while you find something cool. Like a whiskey bible or a Wayne's World Dice Game. And sometimes you'd just find garbage, like a VHS copy of CITY IN PANIC. Man, I should have figured...
The movie seems to have been made by a group of high school freshmen who just found out what sexual discrimination is, and thought that they were really "pushing the envelope" by involving a taboo subject such as AIDS. Ugh. Nothing in this movie works, and the only reason why the ending is a surprise is because you stopped caring about figuring anything out. Halfway through the thing, you can't even hear it over the sounds of your own prayers for an end to the cruelty emanating from the television.
I would end this review with something along the lines of "Stay away from this movie at all cost," but just the simple fact that you are reading this means that it is too late. I can see no reason why anyone would search out this movie unless they had already had the misfortune of viewing it. Sorry guy. We've got meetings on Friday at 9pm over at the Rec Center. Punch and pie.
The Wicker Man (2006)
"Not the bees!"
The 2006 edition of THE WICKER MAN is, without a doubt in my mind, the very worst remake in cinematic history. It is also dangerously close to being one of the worst films ever made. I think that Robin Hardy, Ed Woodward, Christopher Lee, Britt Ekland and all that were a part of the 1973 version (a great film everyone should see) should get a free kick to the nuts of "George Lucas Look-alike Contest" runner up Neil LaBute and Nicolas Cage. I couldn't believe how awful Cage was in this pile of llama dung! I wanted to turn the movie off so many times, but I was frozen in awe of how utterly atrocious it was. Watching this movie is almost self-mutilating. I know this is just another negative review, but I feel it is much more. I feel a need as a compassionate human being to steer as many people away from this movie as I can!
The Gingerdead Man (2005)
Lower your expectations and let the cookie crumble.
I know. You're right. This movie is bad.
I know. Only three people die despite the Gingerdead Man having the opportunity to off them all. A lot of people are also incredibly disappointed at the boob count being at zero. (Now that's just a lame reason not to like a movie. Act like you've seen some in the flesh guys.)
It's bad, so what? What did you expect when you picked up a Full Moon Feature anyway? Maybe you have to watch it the way I watched it (with a group of 15 people). I enjoyed the movie. Certainly better than a lot of what Full Moon Features (the fifth incarnation of FM) pumps out on a regular basis. The acting is sub-par, but honestly not horrible. The humor is dumb, but dumb enough to make you laugh. The effects are a bit on the cheesy side, but this isn't ILM and you should know that. There weren't that many deaths, but the most annoying characters (in my opinion anyway) get it. I wanted to cheer when the Butcher Baker got cooked! And at the very heart of the movie is just the kind of B horror that anyone who would even consider watching this movie loves in their heart of hearts. Plus, Gary Busey gave a Gary Busey performance. Yes, he was under used, but if they used him any more than the movie would have REALLY sucked.
Basically, if the prospect of a murderer played by Gary Busey getting turned into a homicidal gingerbread cookie interests you, then you should definitely give this movie a shot! Form your own opinions, make your own judgements, but if you're highly critical by nature, skip it. This isn't on par with Band's earlier work, but entertaining enough for at least one spin of the DVD.
Evil Bong (2006)
Bong watered down. Stoners only.
Usually I enjoy Charles Band's brand of incredibly cheesy comedy/horror/sci-fi schlock. I thoroughly enjoyed his earlier work with HIDEOUS!, HEAD OF THE FAMILY, THE CREEPS, and even have a soft spot in my heart for THE DUNGEONMASTER (even it's poster cameo in TROLL). Surely he has dropped off a little with THE GINGERDEAD MAN, PUPPET MASTER LEGACY, and DOLL GRAVEYARD but the films aren't without the Full Moon Charm. EVIL BONG, too, is not without all that makes a Full Moon movie a Full Moon movie, but I could not give it the usual 5 or 6 star rating for a number of reasons. First though, I can say that parts of this movie were some of the funniest Charles Band has turned out in years. The entire Grandpa in the wheelchair scene had me in stitches. Luann's "I'm horny!" dance was really funny considering my girl has done a similar routine before. Bachman's character, too, provided a chuckle or two. Also, Tommy Chong makes me laugh, and anything he does will make me laugh. I can't accredit that to Band or even the film, though. Really, if it wasn't for grandpa I would have given this one a 3 regardless of Tommy Chong's always funny presence. The rest of the movie basically served as a lame cameo-fest (no character beside the Gingerdead Man has anything memorable or funny to say) and shamelessly plugged Band's completely impractical chain of bras. Plus, the only character that provided a source of interest in the first part of the movie dies first. I've gotten used to Band's credits lasting way too long, but to also put in, as one person stated, THAT 70'S SHOW-esquire pot leaf graphics throughout the film frustrated me. The fact that there are plenty of boobs doesn't save it either. Boobs don't make movies, they only enhance them. Maybe I would have enjoyed it better if I was still in college, if you know what I mean. Maybe I should have been in that special state of mind to truly enjoy the film, but it's too late now. After last night, I doubt I'll ever waste that much time to watch it again.
If you're one of those "professional stoners" and must have anything to do with weed (or Tommy Chong) than this will certainly make a nice addition to your collection. I'm pretty sure that's why Band made it in the first place. For anyone else, even for people who enjoy Full Moon, you might want to pass on EVIL BONG.
Freddy's Dead: The Final Nightmare (1991)
A tragic "end."
This is going to be the most useless comment I have ever put down, but yet I must do it to warn you about the atrocity to cinema that "Freddy's Dead" is. It is not only the very worst chapter of the Nightmare series, but is right up there with the worst horror sequel of all time! It was boring, pointless, and nearly death free. The horrible 3-D ending and over-the-top CORNY kills are enough to drive this "film" into the ground. However, it doesn't stop there, just add bad acting, a terrible script, and a number of cheesy cameos and you've got yourself this heaping pile of guano! It's no wonder why Freddy, as always played by Robert Englund, has made two postmortem appearances. I would too if I went out like that. This is a strictly fans only movie, don't stare at our shame.
Child's Play (1988)
I'm with Dee Snider on this one...
...when he said, "It's a doll. Just friggin' step on it!" Being a horror movie maven, I am often criticized by my dislike of this particular film and the sequels it generated (all of them laughably bad). Chucky is often regarded as one of the big slashers, though hits the proverbial glass ceiling while trying to obtain the status of Freddy, Jason, and Michael. Yeah, there is a reason for that. Albeit the story is quite original, and the concept itself pretty scary, the payoff would have been a whole lot more effective had he transported himself into something a bit more fierce. Yes yes, that is part of the whole duality of the situation. That doesn't stop it from not being good. The direction was good, the acting was par (Chris Saradon is always great), but it just wasn't tense or scary past the age of 12 max.
He'll have his fans, but I'm just going to leave Chucky in the box.
Switchback (1997)
Just a good action/thriller.
I really enjoyed this film. There are plenty of imperfect action/thrillers out there that fell much, much shorter than "Switchback." I've always enjoyed typically protagonist actors reverse roles, and I thought that Danny Glover did great. He wasn't Robin Williams in "Insomnia" (or "One Hour Photo" for that matter) but he was strong. I felt that delivering his performance in typical good guy fashion really added. Dennis Quaid wasn't phenomenal in the film, but he did fine. There was some real tension in most scenes, and though you knew what was going on, there was the occasional shadow of doubt. Sure the ending was the usual good triumphs over evil scenario, but so was "Terminator," "Die Hard," and for that matter "Braveheart." Sure the plot had some holes, but all-in-all I thought this was a solid movie.
Night Shadows (1984)
Did you like The Stuff? Check this one out!
I've really got nothing to add that hasn't already been commented on about this movie. I just wanted to add my voice to the chorus and say that this is indeed an underrated gem. Not good, but bad enough to be good.
As I had mentioned in the title, this movie struck me as being pretty similar to the cult hit "The Stuff." It's the whole "backwood rednecks harboring a dark secret" thing. I actually enjoyed this movie more than "The Stuff" to tell you the truth. You didn't see Michael Moriarty karate kick a horde of blue faced vampire/zombie children in that one did ya? "Night Shadows," or "Mutant" as most known it as, also didn't attempt to save itself with cameos and guest spots from B+ list movie stars or SNL alum.
Be warned, the film quality is low, and in some parts it is difficult to see. That's b-movies for ya, though.
Flesh-Eating Mothers (1988)
Funny. I felt like my brain was being eaten.
I am a B-Horror Movie junkie. I am an avid collector of blood-soaked schlock. Bad horror movies, in my eyes, "complete the circle" (its so bad it becomes good again by circling back up the quality loop) "Flesh Eating Mothers" is one of the only movies that I've ever seen that pulls a 520 on said loop. It is so bad that it surpasses the good mark and circles back down to the very bottom. I don't know how it did it, but it sure did. The film had all the tools to be a great cheesy horror flick. An 'out there' premise incorporating zombies, some corny-yet-amusing humor, sex, violence...in its respective field, it should have been a homerun! However, the very things that could have made it into a good-bad movie ultimately lead to its demise. The script became too corny, the plot became way too drawn out, the sex and violence became very sparse, and the action was just too too bad. It is up there with the most painfully long 89 minutes in film history.
As a lover of bad film, I cannot turn those brave enough to pop this one into their players away. By all means, see it so that you may form your own opinions. Just don't say I didn't warn you.
Anchorman: The Legend of Ron Burgundy (2004)
Stupid, boring, unfunny, and popular. Who says society is decaying?
Insipid garbage. Nothing more than fuel for those morons who only speak in movie quotes. Steve Carell was OK, but don't kill precious brain cells to see him in this pile of llama feces. He's in plenty of other, actual, films. Jack Black, too, was one of the only spots even comparable to bright. Though even that scene was mired by the wretched wails of Will Ferrell (which he does for almost the entire second half of the movie). Holy hopping hey-zeus, how is this guy still getting paid? I wish some TV producer shoved my uninspired "humor" down America's throat! Then I too could get millions of dollars playing the SAME CHARACTER for the umpteenth time. So, watch this movie if you have the comedic taste equivalent to a house fly on crack. Or if you're a complete idiot, either way don't invite me. I hate this movie on levels hitherto unrealized by cinema.
Starship Troopers (1997)
Want to learn more? No thanks.
Wow. I guess my father isn't the only person that likes this movie after all. Though, I think comments touting this sci-fi schlock as the greatest anti/pro war movie is a bit much. Oh, and the only sentence what should include both "Starship" and "Dr. Strangelove" is: "Dr. Strangelove" is a far superior film to "Starship Troopers." "Starship Troopers" is decent in only one respect, it's a shoot 'em sci-fi film that delivers action. Nothing beyond that. The screenplay incorporated only parts of the novel, and did poorly solidifying any commentary or satire. I mean, I can see what they were getting at, but you've got to be kidding me by saying that it was done on a Kubrick level. The acting was plain BAD, and no matter what anyone says to me to try to justify said acting is useless. It wasn't tongue-in-cheek acting, they were actually trying, and trying really hard. It was also waaaay toooo looooong. It was entertaining enough for me to get through it, but barely.
See it if you like action films. Give your brain two hours off.
Storytelling (2001)
Ironic title. That's a bad thing.
The one word that pops into mind when thinking about Todd Solondz's "Storytelling" is "disappointing." Two words, "thoroughly disappointing." I am a fan of Solondz's earlier films "Happiness" and "Welcome to the Dollhouse," but "Storytelling" lacked that intangible something. However, what it did have was pretension. I guess one could have seen it coming with ol' Todd, and it showed in spades during this film. There was no point that I felt connected to ANY of the characters. Actually, I didn't like or passionately despised all of them. Was that the point? Was I supposed to waste an hour and a half of my life watching the lives of characters I didn't like? Not only did I feel nothing for the characters, but the "horrible" things that happen to them (typical in Solondz fare) brought forth nothing but apathy. The story was stale and went absolutely nowhere, which was a tremendous waste of a great cast. It's categorized as a comedy, but there were very few laughs. I did, however, find it funny when Marty (John Goodman) derides Tobe (Paul Giamatti) for lacking focus. Though, I doubt that was an intended chuckle. I don't know, some people might like this movie, Roger Ebert did. Then again, he did give "Godfather III" three and a half stars...
Bottom line, the film showed nothing, achieved nothing, and was essentially about absolutely nothing. However, if you're into artsy films, even though they are crap, go ahead and waste your time.
28 Days Later... (2002)
Overrated. Nothing special.
I remember when "28 Days Later" was in theaters. After about a month or so, the television ads were up to a full minute to a minute and a half long. They were packed with sterling reviews, thrilling speedy zombie cut scenes, and the promise of three possible endings! A few friends of mine went to see the movie five times so that they could see all three. They weren't the only ones. A ton of my friends were quick to say things like, "You, of all people, will love this movie!" Hype hype hype. If there is one thing I can't friggin' stand is every one and their grandmother telling me I have to see one particular movie. Given, hyped movies are either good or are ruined by the hype and that ratio is hovering around 50%. However, this movie falls into the latter. It wasn't the worst movie ever (close, but at least it had a budget), though right from the start I had issues. Now, I'm down with the idea that some hippie, animal liberation bozos would end up destroying society, but the whole first scene was weak. The movie started becoming promising only to rot away and FAST! I don't know, I personally don't see how this movie is any different than "Dawn of the Dead" other than the fact that "DotD" was a criticism on consumerism and "28 Days" was a commentary on...sex? "Soldiers are horny" seems to be this movie's overall message. Was the ending supposed to reflect something else, because any and all attempts to convince me otherwise have Stretch Armstrong shaking his head. I've been reading the glowing comments of this movie, and also shaking mine. I've read that it plainly deals with the hopelessness of the situation...as if "DotD" or even "Return of the Living Dead" didn't. There's nothing particularly special about this movie. And talking about "Return," I think it's bull to declae "28 Days" as the introduction of the "Fast Zombie." There were plenty of zombies running around in "Return of the Living Dead" and "RotLD Part 2." How about the scene when all the zombies bum rush the cops? There are two separate scenes of zombies bum rushing the cops in "RotLD," and another one when they take out the paramedics! So what, we should give credit to "28 Days" because some of the zombies were superhumanly fast? We should give it full marks for making them faster? Please. Also, I've read that the movie's landmark because it doesn't rely on violence. Instead it relies on changing a tire really really quickly so the stampeding herd of zombies don't infect you. Come on! This is supposed to be tension? It was like watching NASCAR! Oh, and how about calling the disease "rage?" How friggin' hokey can you get? Oh, and only one of the possible three endings was decent. There was certainly a reason why the other two weren't in the original final cut.
I will say that the sequel looks interesting, not that I'm going to pay theater prices to see it, but I will definitely give it a try on DVD. As for the predecessor, I'll just leave it for the monkeys.
Trainspotting (1996)
Read the book. If you like this movie, do yourself that favor.
I usually hate it when people tell me, "The book was better than the movie." Of course it was! Two hour of film cannot possibly hold the content of hundreds of pages of text. I know, you know, we all know. However, if there is one movie that I cannot stress the old trite adage on enough it is "Trainspotting." My friends, my brother, my cousins, people I didn't even know kept telling me over and over that I NEEDED to see "Trainspotting." My life was incomplete without watching the movie. Even after I told them that I've already read the book, they still told me to forget the book and that the movie was probably better. So, I buckled. I saw it...and quite frankly I'm glad that I read it first because the movie was kinda weak. The movie bare-boned the plot, left out some of the best scenes in the book (Rents did more than just dive into a toilet in a bathroom), left a couple of pretty interesting characters out completely, and SICK BOY SHOT THE DOG!! The directing and the acting were both very good, but the script seemed to be fueled solely on heroin. The whole movie revolved around heroin, and the book didn't. Heroin was very important to the story, obviously, but that wasn't it. The book actually dealt with the ideas presented by Rents in the all-too-famous opening lines. I felt the movie worked under the assumption that drug-culture IS anti-culture. It's not. The movie irked me in the way that hippies irk me, you're not sticking it to the man by doing drugs. Anyway, the movie's decent, but hear my words...IF THIS IS ONE OF YOUR FAVORITE MOVIES, TAKE THE TIME TO READ IRVINE WELSH'S NOVEL OF THE SAME NAME. YOU WILL NOT REGRET IT!!
The Return of the Texas Chainsaw Massacre (1994)
Well...first I'm gonna kill ya.
Okay, it's not the greatest movie in the world. Okay, it almost directly rips off the first one. Okay, the plot twist at the end is more confusing and dumb than thought provoking. Who cares? I sure don't! This was the first Texas Chainsaw I had ever seen. I loved it then and I love it now. The movie is about madness, plain old madness, and thats what it delivers. Again, it borrows heavily on the original. A bit tacky to say the least, but its got a lot of its own to stand on. I found that the character of Vilmer to be the best "not Leatherface" psycho of the series. Just edging out Bill Moseley as Chop-Top. Its popcorn horror, plain and simple. This movie scratches that part of me that also enjoys Cannibal Holocaust and Toxic Avenger. I recommend giving it a shot. You might hate it, or then again it might become one of your favorites.
The Worm Eaters (1977)
To each his own and to me, Worm Eaters.
I think that it's a shame that collectors of movies such as this are steering good folk like you away from "The Worm Eaters." As far as I can tell this is a love it or hate it kind of movie, as is the case with any movie of its ilk. I think that it lacks respect to tell people not to bother with this film. Look, if you are into movies like "Big Meat Eater" or "Cannibal Campout" do yourself a favor and get your hands on "The Worm Eaters." You may not like it, but it may end up becoming one of your favorite movies! You know the deal with films like these. Jeez, "Flesh Eating Mothers" was awful, but I would never tell anyone to avoid it! I think this movie is downright hilarious, and the overacting (which I'm sure is not too unintentional) just makes the camp/slash/fun level sky-rocket.
And to all of those people who thought this comment wasn't useful (though I know you will probably never read this): You can sit and spin!
Scanners (1981)
Would have made a better book.
I'm not going to sit here and rewrite the movie's plot or go into detail about the sociopolitical implications of David Cronenberg's "Scanners." I'm just going to call it as I see it. I'm a big fan of Cronenberg's movies and here we have a classic case of his most famous being his poorest. Granted, the infamous head explosion scene is one of the greatest moments in all of Horrordom. However, the movie slowly spirals downward after that. Possibly a poor move to have the best scene so soon in the film. The movie is plagued by a wooden performance from the main character and the fact that "mind battles" don't exactly translate into good film. Whenever I see the episode of South Park when Cartman has a psychic dual, I always think of "Scanners." This is not to say that you shouldn't see this movie. I wouldn't strongly recommend it, but I wouldn't discourage anyone from seeing it. I just feel that if you really want to watch a great Cronenberg movie, and you've picked up "Scanners," you are doing yourself a great injustice.
Davey gets an E for effort...
Dead Ringers (1988)
All you really need to know about Dead Ringers.
There isn't much more to be said about "Dead Ringers" that hasn't already been said on this comment board. All I really want to add is an expurgated version of what others have said:
If you're looking for a Cronenberg creature fest, you haven't found it. Though if you like Cronenberg's movies and enjoy his take on the body politic than you will like this movie. The transition from "The Fly" to "Dead Ringers" is a very interesting one. Good conversation starter with anyone who is really into horror films or film students (the ones who aren't stuck up buttholes).
Though the movie does contain some humor, this is not a movie for the light-hearted. This is one of Cronenberg's most disturbing and dark films.
"Dead Ringers" is the direct opposite of a fast paced thriller. It's also not the best date movie ever filmed either.
If you are even a little bit of a fan of Jeremy Irons, you are going to want to watch this film. Top of his game here.
That's about it. I would recommend this movie, but not to anyone. This isn't exactly an Everyman movie. I suggest that you see one of his other films before watching "Dead Ringers" to get a feel for Cronenberg's style. I think, had I seen "DR" first, I wouldn't have understood it as much. I say get "The Brood" and/or "Videodrome" under your belt first. I really liked the movie, but I think that it does tend to drag and the theme begins to really beat you over the head. However, that's just one man's opinion. That's one of the great things about Cronenberg movies; everyone has their own take on it. Being so character driven everyone relates and reacts to certain aspects differently.
The Last Unicorn (1982)
Keep this movie a childhood memory! Don't ruin it by watching it when you're older.
There are three movies with this animation style that I fondly remember from my youth. This movie, "The Last Unicorn," "Flight of Dragons" and "The Hobbit." I own copies of both "Dragons" and "The Hobbit" (both excellent) and I hadn't seen "The Last Unicorn" in more than a decade. That was until today and now I wish I hadn't. What bothered me the most was the script. It was incredibly choppy and often inane. Things would happen for no reason and other things would happen without explanation. We're not just talking about little things here either; we're talking about key plot points! The story itself isn't that great to begin with, but it could have worked had the script been decent. Not even close. On top of that the music was awful! I know that music in movies such as these rarely have what one would call classic pieces, but the music in this movie made me want to knock myself unconscious with a bowling ball. This was one of those films that I was going to show to my kids some day, but it just got cut. I don't think I could ever sit through that crap fest again. Disappointed is putting it mildly.
Willow (1988)
Willow is a great film...unless you are a joyless dipwad
While reading many of the reviews to this movie, most of them (and almost all of the negative ones) invoke the names of George Lucas and JRR Tolkien. These said negative reviews go something like this: blah blah blah Star Wars blah blah Lucas cashing in blah blah Darth Vader blah blah. OR this: blah blah Tolkien was better blah blah rip-off blah blah. Well, first I have to say is that I'm sure a lot of these people knocking Willow for being "Tolkienesque" wouldn't know who and how Tolkien wrote if Lord of the Rings was never made into a film. Those people can stuff it. A very good point was made by someone else reviewing Willow, in the fact that comparing something to Tolkien, or referring to something as Tolkienesque is far too easy. Tolkien is to fantasy as Dracula is to vampires. You can't get very far with either theme without bumping into something similar. On the Lucas front, please, can we stop with all of these comparisons to Star Wars and Darth Vader. No wonder you didn't like the film, you were far too busy thinking about Star Wars! Are you going to start brushing American Graffiti, another Howard/Lucas film, with that fine tooth comb from a galaxy far far away? Don't make it sound like this was Lucas' film, it was Howard's! Georgey didn't start getting completely egotistical until the 90s. Some of the naysayers even knock it for not being a straight up good vs. evil film! Some even called it far-fetched! It's a friggin' fantasy movie!! Are you people nuts? What person in their right mind condemns a fantasy film for being too fantastic?! Willow is what it is, and that's an action-adventure slice of unreality with plenty of sorcery, sword fights, and fictional creatures. Sure, it's not cliché free and it hasn't got the comedic timing of the Marx Brothers. So what? If you can discredit all that is good with Willow for the scant bad, then your favorite movie is probably Anchorman.
Heavy Metal (1981)
Ehhh...Not saying I didn't like it but...ehhh...
A friend of mine let me borrow this movie about five years ago. I was still in college so I was broke and didn't have the required DVD player to watch it. The friend who let me borrow it was a home town buddy, so I couldn't exactly use his player that was a hundred miles away. It took me three weeks to locate a DVD player I could use. During that three week span, the box sat at the edge of my desk, tempting me. I waited in great anticipation to finally get to watch what my friend had told me was "the greatest animated film ever!" As you might have guessed, the hype and anticipation left me duly disappointed. I have since read the comics, re-watched the movie, and even sat through the execrable sequel "2000." The whole experience never got remarkably better. Even though the comics are good, they aren't eye-popping like everyone says they are. The movie is certainly enjoyable, but I feel the only reason it has such cult status is because it's futuristic and there are animated boobs. "Heavy Metal" lacks meaty realism and true human condition amid fantastic backgrounds as such animated films as the '85 "Vampire Hunter D" or "La Planete Sauvage." On the upside, the soundtrack is awesome, the voice characterization is worthy, and, at times, it is a kick ass movie. Just don't believe all the hype! Good, not immortal.
El espanto surge de la tumba (1973)
Not great...even for a bad movie lover like myself.
If you're anything like me, you can't get enough of bad horror movies. While others will mock such favorites as "Jack Frost", "Silent Night, Deadly Night Part 2", and "The Video Dead", I rewind them and watch again! I wish the same could be said for "El espanto surge de la tumba," or as Americans might know it, "Horror Rises from the Tomb." The movie starts out promising enough. It had the same feel to it as "Anthropophagus: The Grim Reaper" but soon fell very short. Apart from a few well executed death scenes and a somewhat surprising death near the end (though the movie's so drawn out by then, you don't care) "El espanto surge de la tumba" is a stale, yawn fest. I've heard good things about Jacinto Molina, so I hope this isn't the best he has to offer.
Highlights of "El espanto surge de la tumba" for those who have seen it
* Wow, I didn't know they executed witches like that. * I know him! He was just the...yeah, that's him! * Do you know John Edward? Tell him to kiss my grits! * I DON'T HAVE TO EXPLAIN MY ART TO YOU!! * No one was in that car. I can tell. * What? * Who the hell is she? * Isn't that her father!! Did Woody Allen direct this? * What? * When did this become a soft core porn? * Fire! Fire!! * I honestly didn't see that coming. Too bad this movie sucks. * Little bit like Conan. * Oh wow, it's over. High five!