Reviews

17 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
Dead Set (2008)
10/10
Perfection, Seriously...
27 June 2009
Charlie Brooker might be my favorite person working in entertainment on both sides of the biz: commentator and content creator. His series, "Charlie Brooker's Screenwipe", is one of the most astute, insightful, hilarious and informative about television you'll come across, and its spin-off, "Newswipe", really lifts the lid off TV news). As a longtime zombie aficionado (as well as purveyor), I came to this with high expectations and was not disappointed. If anything, it overwhelmed me with how breathtakingly good it was.

Ballsier than most horror features, "Dead Set" is also richly satirical, brilliantly written and beautifully acted. Each character is fully realized and distinct, the performances across the board stellar, with lead Jaime Winstone tough, capable and winsome. Andy Nyman almost steals the show as Patrick, the profane producer. He channels Brooker's venomous wit and amps it up. Whereas Brooker as a TV personality can spew invective with charm and good humor (even when he seriously loathes something), Patrick radiates malignance. But because of Nyman's great gifts as an actor, he renders Patrick somehow magnetic. Even when he's doing some truly unspeakable acts, you cannot look away (though some more sensitive viewers might want to watch through interlaced fingers).

I would put this on the top shelf of zombie--or indeed any horror--cinema. It's credible, exciting, captivating and worthy of multiple viewings.
22 out of 29 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Fan of the Series? Then Skip This.
24 June 2009
After reading a few bad reviews of 'Dead Like Me: Life After Death', I was prepared for something not very good. What I got was like watching a necrophiliac having his way with the corpse of that wonderful show. How Stephen Godchaux and John Masius, both regular writers on the series, could seemingly have so little connection to everything that made that series special is a deep mystery (and I don't feel good slagging this off, as I've enjoyed their work in the past).

Where the series had been original, lively, funny, poignant and quirky (in the good way, which is a rarity), this thing is irritating, boring, not even remotely amusing and feels disrespectful and opportunistic. The threadbare plot involving a callow replacement for the sadly absent Rube (performed with subtlety and wit in the series by Mandy Patinkin) is a bust that never goes anywhere or even resolves itself. That Rube's substitute is a man who was killed in the World Trade Center on 9/11 is in particularly bad taste, especially since it adds nothing to his character, who is a miserable creep; it's just a weird throwaway. The replacement of series original Laura Harris, as Daisy Adair, is also a major trouble spot. Sarah Wynter, in a word, is awful. Harris's Daisy was imbued with a knowing sadness under her surface superficiality. Wynter just devours the scenery playing Daisy as a vapid, talentless idiot.

It's nice that talented original cast members Ellen Muth, Callum Blue, Jasmine Guy, et al, got work, but they deserved a better vehicle than this shoddy, mawkish mess.

If you are a fan of the Showtime series, do yourself a favor and skip this. Once you've watched it you can't un-watch it and doing so will only make you mourn anew the premature death of the original. Which, I suppose, is apt.
72 out of 82 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Halloween (2007)
1/10
I Hate to be a Hater...
17 May 2009
...but this was rubbish.

Though Zombie's adept at creating it, relentless unpleasantness doesn't necessarily translate to compelling horror. The interminable opening 45-minutes of prologue (seriously), in which the audience is treated to Michael Myers's origin story, is dull, ugly and above all misses the point. This and the equally futile (and terrible) remake of "The Texas Chainsaw Massacre" make the mistake of adding wretched back-stories to their killers. In Carpenter's classic, in every way superior original, the enigmatic engine that propels Myers is precisely what makes him so scary. His motivation is pure evil. That's enough.

The ugly family life in the 2007 version bogs things down and does what? Make Myers sympathetic? No. All it does is set up an improbable and somewhat annoying "twist" that doesn't pay off in the third act. Zombie knows how to do unpleasant. It's his forte as a filmmaker. What he doesn't know how to do is create likable characters. The trio of girls in this are cyphers, even (especially) Laurie Strode.

This remake was unnecessary, tedious and a waste of time.
4 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
AVP: Obituary
15 April 2008
Unbelievable. Really, unbelievable. It's shocking how bad this movie is. The awfulness actually made me tense, and I doubt that was the kind of tension the filmmakers were hoping to foster in an audience. Shane Salerno's hackneyed screenplay is riddled with stolen moments, clichés and the worst dialogue I've encountered in a very long while. "AVP: Requiem" is a movie populated by flimsy archetypes and all are lazily wrought.

Cinematographer Daniel Pearl has done a remarkable job of obscuring the action in every single scene, making it nigh on impossible to follow the action or know who's doing what to whom (or what). Doesn't matter; it's not like there's a plot or characters or anything to care about. Even the much ballyhooed gore is clouded. The Strause Brothers—forgive me; I mean "The Brothers Strause"—should stick to special effects and leave directing to directors. Given their SFX background one would think their feature debut would be a special effects showcase, but as I've noted, the entire production is a murky wash of glistening mud.

I saw "Alien" during its original release in 1979 and was beyond wowed by it. I was in junior high school and it left an indelible mark, not only as a scarefest, but as an exemplar of both the sci-fi and horror genre. It was made by a consummate craftsman, Ridley Scott, and elevated the scripted material (basically a solid "B" monster in space movie) to art. "AVP: Requiem" diminishes the franchise to less than a terrible "B" monster movie; it's garbage. Bury it.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Battlestar Galactica: Crossroads: Part 2 (2007)
Season 3, Episode 20
10/10
Remarkable
28 March 2007
My head is reeling after all the info and emotion this episode just dumped on my head. Great performances, as ever, and exceptionally powerful writing. And surprises by the bushel. Really, this episode took my breath away. It's going to be a long nine months until B.G. resumes. Presumably the DVDs will be out sooner than that, because I have to sway some folks who've been holding out on watching this amazing series and they'd best get all caught up by 2008.

Oh, side note (re some of the previous comments): Jimi Hendrix did a great cover of "All Along the Watchtower", but it's a Bob Dylan composition. Credit where credit is due.
44 out of 48 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
The Difference is Night and Day
23 October 2005
Right off the bat I have to say that "Day of the Dead 2: Contagium" has got to be one of the worst movies I've stupidly sat through in years (though my thumb strayed to the speed-scan button a few times during interminable stretches of padding). I have a feeling this thing was made with some other title in mind like, for instance, plain old "Contagium", but the filmmakers were saddled with the tag-on "Day of the Dead 2" by crass marketing hacks. I'll give the makers of this drek the benefit of the doubt. But there is no doubt that they should never, ever make a movie again. As noted by other posters, "DOTD2:C" cherry-picks bits and bobs from other genre offerings and turns them into an emetic pile of poo. The acting ranges from awful to competent, but the writing and direction are heinous. That it was a labor that took years to realize boggles the mind. Talk about "why bother?" A must avoid on every level.

On a personal note: I made the double mistake of watching it right after George A. Romero's "Land of the Dead", which no doubt made "Contagium" even more toxic a shock to my system. It was like following a beautifully cooked piece of filet mignon with a dessert of dog vomit.
8 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Wow..... I mean really.... wow.
3 May 2005
Watching "Riding the Bus with My Sister" was a life-changing experience for me. Before it started I was a dyed-in-the-wool hardcore atheist, but now, having watched it, I believe Satan is real. There's simply no other explanation for the existence of this cinematic turd. Everyone involved should be deeply ashamed. It made me feel sorry for actors in general, because who else would be desperate and needy enough to be seen publicly humiliating themselves like this? People do some strange things for money, but being in this outdoes any stunt Fear Factor challenged its contestants with. "Go on, we dare you to be in a Hallmark TV movie with Rosie O'Donnell playing a retard." "Uh, no thanks." Anjelica Huston proves directorial talent isn't necessarily hereditary, but honestly what could she do with this material (other than the smart thing, which would have been run like hell in the opposite direction)? Rosie O'Donnell is horrible as a rule, but in "Riding the Bus with My Sister" she is the face that launched a thousand nightmares. I am afraid to go to sleep tonight. During one of the many sappy Hallmark commercials peppered throughout the broadcast, a woman visits her newly independent Downs syndrome brother. He has a quiet dignity and speaks well. Rosie O'Donnell, on the other hand, plays an obnoxious braying freak. But she's not alone. It was an interesting choice to include nary a sympathetic or even mildly likable character. Maybe Richard T. Jones's Jesse, but only because I like that actor and felt bad he was in this. Really bad.

And I never thought I'd write these words, but there's actually something worse than the output of Nicholas Sparks. The writing, the acting, the everything is horrendous. A+ for homogeneity, I suppose.

Like many of the other posters here I tuned in for "the wrong reasons." I did not want my heart warmed (thought heartburn was resultant); I wanted laughs. I did get them, but the pain became almost unbearable midway through. Like a marathon of masochism, my wife and I made it all the way to the bitter, completely devoid of revelation end—a true endurance test that left us questioning our sanity. We clearly lack good sense.

And actually, it sort of deserves two ratings: 1 out of 10 in terms of genuine merit, but 10 out of 10 on the "so bad it'll blow your mind" scale.

Can we start taking up a collection to jettison Rosie into space? Please? Side note: 3 cast members of the remake of "Dawn of the Dead" were in this. Go Canada!

Additional side note: having just attended the Diane Arbus retrospective at the Metropolitan Museum of Art, I wonder if the decision to make Andie MacDowell's character a photographer who gets a solo show featuring shots of her retarded sister was a misguided homage to Arbus and her "Untitled" series of photos of retarded women. Nah, I'm giving credit where credit isn't due.
53 out of 84 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Soooooooo Disappointing
23 February 2005
As a certifiable "Dick-head," I bought this docu in the hopes it might shed some additional light on one of the greatest purveyors of sci-fi and American literature in general. Dick was a brilliant -- a superlative I seldom use -- man. His stories were fascinating meditations on what constitutes reality, self, etc. Sadly, this docu is a cheapo featuring some nice interviews with Dick friends and fans (could have done without the fans, who while sincere didn't seem that knowledgeable or at the very least interesting).

Most distracting -- and reeking of padding -- are the "animated" segments. Truly awful. I assume they were done in Flash, but they are static beyond belief. I speed-scanned through them all.

Dick deserves a fine documentary. This isn't it. Read Lawrence Sutin's bio if you seek info on Dick. Or read Paul Williams' interviews with the man. Skip this sorry effort.
7 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Tomie (1998)
3/10
`Uzumaki' it ain't.
16 March 2004
`Tomie will not die', boasts the ad copy, but she will bore you to death. This glacially paced Japanese offering is best avoided (unless you've run out of Ambien™ and need to grab some shuteye). Sometimes a slower pace builds mood, nurtures a sense of foreboding, but in `Tomie' all it does is make your eyelids heavy. The performances are okay, but the script is weak, the story is vague and the payoff is nonexistent. It's also shot in a very perfunctory and static manner, so even the cinematography is lackluster.

The funniest thing about the DVD is the behind-the-scenes feature, which shows the `special effects' team creating one of the most phony looking decapitated heads since the glory days of ‘60s schlock cinema. That and the `disfigured' lad with his hilariously unconvincing bugged-out Jack Elam eye. Very amateurish DIY stuff.
2 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
One of the Greatest Films of All Time!
15 February 2004
Warning: Spoilers
Okay, that got your attention.

I think what some of the other armchair critics here are missing is that this film is hilarious. Okay, it's inadvertent. And if you're looking for quality plotting, acting, writing, directing, character development, etc., etc., then look elsewhere. But if you want to be entertained, watch this compendium of every hackneyed cliché of the '80s and enjoy.

This flick has baddies dressed like the dinner theater cast of The Road Warrior (remember when urban gangs were running around in black leather pants, suspenders, sporting cut up tires and massive shoulder pads? Me either). Come on, folks, lighten up. This thing has break dancing. Poppin' and lockin'. A totally gung-ho, perpetually upbeat black sidekick (who gets killed, naturally). Oh, I'm sorry. Was that a spoiler? As if. The soundtrack is throbs with deliriously derivative synth music. Then there's the Exterminator's gal pal, an `I've come to conquer Broadway' hoofer who's paying her dues doing sub-Flashdance-esque numbers at a club. So of course just before her big B'way audition she gets the Jeff Gillooly treatment across the shins by the revenge-seeking ne'er-do-wells. `I'm sorry, but she'll never dance again.'

For all you geography buffs, thrill to the jumps between New York (where the flick is ostensibly set) and Los Angeles (where the flick is ostensibly not set), often within the same sequence. That garbage truck the Exterminator and his pal drive really puts on the miles. Plus, you get to see Arye Gross doing his impression of a street tough. John Turturro is in this baby. But the best is Mario Van Peebles. You'll want a slice of pineapple to go with all that ham. Delicious.

So, yes, if you want a stirring piece of urban action, look elsewhere. But if you can groove on the `one from column A, one from column B' identikit approach to formula fare, look no further. As an action movie, it blows. But it's funnier than any parody could be
14 out of 20 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Been there, done that...
13 September 2003
If you're looking for a dumbed down, watered down, A.D.D.-addled rip-off of `Jacob's Ladder', this is your flick. Borrowing (stealing) from many sources, this `is it real or only in my mind' collegiate stroll down Confusion Lane is one not worth taking. The cast isn't to blame. They grapple bravely with their lighter than air archetypal cliché-riddled roles, but the writing is awful and the direction is severely lacking. The `surprise' ending should come of no surprise to anyone with more than a dozen functioning brain cells.
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
A Cute Homage to Bert I. Gordon, et al...
6 June 2003
...but what studio exec thought adding cartoon sound effects was a good idea? The smaller spiders in this otherwise decent, albeit goofy flick make similar noises to the Gremlins (if I recall correctly) and other similar cartoony critters, squeaking and tittering as they rampage. This decision smacks of last minute "save" by producers trying to be "creative" and wishing to add "comedic" value to the effort. These sound effects are so distracting they take a B-picture down a couple of notches. The special effects are top notch and the cast is game enough, but whatever clod thought those sounds was a good idea deserves to be cocooned and eaten. This is basically the same movie as `Earth Vs. the Spider', `Giant Spider Invasion' and countless others in this mold, which is not a put down.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Bank Shot (1974)
1/10
Another bad Dortmunder adaptation
2 March 2003
Why can't Dortmunder catch a break? It's bad enough for him that his capers always go awry in the great book series by master plotter Donald E. Westlake, but that's the joy of those fictions. But to have such lousy movies based on his exploits is insult on injury (and irks this particular fan).

The fact is that every Dortmunder flick I've seen has been awful, and this one is no exception. Okay, so they changed the character names (no doubt because the rights were tied up), but name aside, Walter Upjohn Ballentine is still a weird interpretation of the John Archibald Dortmunder from the books. Where did that lisp come from? And the crazy eyebrows? Did Scott contribute those affectations or was he directed to do so? Scott might have actually been good had he played the character as written, but this whole movie is so misdirected (in every sense) and miscast I wonder why they even bothered. It's so strange. Westlake's Dortmunder novels could practically be shot as written (with little trimming for time considerations), yet the filmmakers who tackle these undertakings seem bent on ignoring the timbre of the books and making unwatchable crap.

In the books the characters are much more calm, cool and collected. Everyone in this is shrill, stupid and over-the-top.

Best avoided.
11 out of 21 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Terrible but Fun but Terrible
27 November 2002
There's only two good reasons to endure this schlocky collection of mostly unattributed film clips: young Steve Buscemi and young, thin, almost wholesome-looking (almost) Mark Boone Jr., probably best known these days for playing the sleazy but good-hearted motel clerk in `Memento.' The `host segments' (to borrow an apt term from MST3K) are shot on video and as such are reminiscent of public access television. And that's very appropriate, since this entire production reeks of the public access clip-show aesthetic. Though the bits of comic business Buscemi and Boone get up to together are mostly unfunny (by even the most lax critical standards), they nonetheless elicit chuckles because they're being performed by very game, very earnest (no doubt very glad to have even a crappy job like this) talented young actors. If this was the only thing you'd ever seen him in, you'd never imagine that Buscemi would end up turning in Oscar-worthy performances years later. And to reiterate, the normally dissolute Boone looks almost cuddly - kind of like a low rent Curtis Armstrong (who's already low rent).

The only major criticism to be leveled at this collection of clips is that the attributions are sporadic and follow no apparent logic. Some get superimposed credits at the bottom announcing what they are (seemingly all the Hershel Gordon Lewis clips get this favored treatment), but most whiz by without telling what they are. This is a bit maddening if you care about trivia like that. But if you don't, why the hell are you watching trash like this in the first place?
6 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
I want my ninety minutes back
22 October 2002
Some sort of accolades must be given to `Hellraiser: Bloodline'. It's actually out Full-Mooned Full Moon. It bears all the marks of, say, your `Demonic Toys' or `Puppet Master' series, without their dopey, uh, charm? Full Moon can get away with silly product because they know it's silly. These Hellraiser things, man, do they ever take themselves seriously. This increasingly stupid franchise (though not nearly as stupid as I am for having watched it) once made up for its low budgets by being stylish. Now it's just ish.
2 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Kid (2001 TV Movie)
1/10
If Gahan Wilson were dead he'd be spinning in his grave...
9 June 2002
But he isn't dead, so it's puzzling how he'd allow something this bad to bear his name (as well as a bastardized slapdash imitation of his unique drawing style).

Gahan Wilson is one of my all-time favorite cartoonists, his gag panels for Playboy, The New Yorker and many other periodicals having provided many laughs over the years. He is also one of the first cartoonists whose work so moved me I was inspired to become a cartoonist myself. When I first encountered the comic strips, "Nuts" -- which featured the "The Kid" -- in National Lampoon back in the '70s, it was revelatory. I marveled at the subtlety, empathy, and truth in these strips. When they were collected as a trade paperback I saved my allowance money and bought a copy, which I still have.

So, suffice it to say I've been a fan of Wilson's oeuvre since I was about four. I'm now almost 38, so it's been a long-term love affair with his work. More's the pity then, that this animated made-for-TV abomination is so horrible. From the irritating and oft-repeated "nya-nyah-nyah-nyah-nyah-nyah-nyah-nyah" song that introduces each of the segments, to the wretched animation, this thing is a total disappointment. I can't imagine that Wilson was happy with it. He didn't write it, so at least he isn't to blame for the script. Made for Showtime, this is one of those premium cable offerings that overuses cursing for cursing's own sake. I have no problem with cussing; in fact, when used well it can achieve a certain poetry, but sometimes, as in the case of this piece of &^%$, it's only there because they could put it there; it adds nothing.

It really is a shame that "Nuts" wasn't tapped as direct source material, because that would have made for a thoughtful and infinitely funnier offering. This thing comes off as a very poor imitation of "South Park", a show that does everything well that this does so poorly. "South Park" understands kids, understands taboos (and how to make and break them and keep it hilarious).

Avoid this at all costs.
4 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Faust (2000)
1/10
Just Like the Comic Book...
23 May 2002
...really, really stupid, ugly and bad.

If your idea of a fine ol' cinematic experience is seeing puppety, rubbery, crappy monsters, unfathomably bad acting, and (the biggest horror of this film) a peroxided Andrew Divoff in a caftan, then this movie is for you! Boy, it's got it all! Honestly, much maligned Ed Wood never made a film this wretched. It's got lots of Europeans playing Americans (accents so thick you could cut them with a knife); it's got a lead with the screen presence of moist balsa wood; it's got poor ol' Jeffrey Combs, who really needs to break ties with Brian Yuzna. Combs actually has acting chops and deserves better than to guzzle Divoff's big yellow snake (I'm not being smutty here; the poor guy does just that). Oy, this movie. I can't say it didn't hold my attention, but it was that kind of stunned, "What the hell possessed them (get it?) to make such a lousy movie?"

Where are Mike and The Bots when you need them?
3 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed