sangles-1 Reviews

Terminator Salvation (2009)

By Far the Worst Terminator Film of the Franchise

[3/10 · 26 May 2009]

This installment has faults on so many levels that I wish I had those precious 2 hours I spend watching the film back. While some of the visual effects are enjoyable (the only reason I didn't give it a 1 out of 10) the story is paper-thin at best and whether or not you are angered by the fact that the entire Terminator "storyline" throughout the first films is basically botched, you will be annoyed by the fact that even in this sci-fi/action film, things happen that just couldn't happen. Fatal injuries become just a scratch, "plot twists" are obvious a mile away with heavy foreshadowing, and Skynet is both unimpressive and, frankly, a little stupid.

Fans of the Terminator mythology need to leave their attachment aside while watching this film. The tie-ins and references to the other films are few and very disappointing. After reading the synopsis of the ORIGINAL script on CHUD.com (before McG let Christian Bale re-write it) I can confirm it would have at least been much more interesting.

Hostel (2005)

Very Tarantino

[8/10 · 26 June 2007]

This is a Tarantino flick as much as Eli Roth's. There is plenty of shock, gore, and even a little comedy.

This is the film in a nutshell - In modern-day Slovakia there exists a Hostel which lures young, low-profile tourists into staying long enough so that they can be captured and used by a "hunting club". The main characters are lured by the prospect of beautiful women and plenty of sex. When they first arrive, the girls are everything they expected and more. Later, we see that the characters start to disappear one by one as they are abducted.

They are taken to an old warehouse run by an organization which charges members (worldwide) fees for the right to torture and kill a victim of their very own, in the privacy of their own cells, using dozens of torture instruments.

I rented the unrated DVD version of the film. It definitely goes beyond a standard "R" rating. One disturbing aspect of the film is that the "club" charges the most $$ for the chance to kill Americans (they are considered the fillet mignon). Another is the fact that none of what happens is all that unbelievable. Jerky guys who travel a long distance to get laid let their guards down and fall victim to beautiful girls, drugs, alcohol, their own egos, and even a band of poor kids who roam the streets as gangs demanding candy! I think Eli Roth is trying to make some sort of social commentary here. You think? What the film does very well is keep you guessing. Every actor is an unknown, so you'll never know who lives and who dies.

Cannibal Ferox (1981)

The REAL deal with this movie

[3/10 · 22 March 2006]

I bought this thing used at a video game store's "clearance bin". I wanted to get that guilty feeling from watching something I've been warned is too intense to watch; I wanted the shock value. I wanted to feel guilty and bad about watching a "banned film". I was very disappointed.

Cannibal Ferox does not work because it is so campy and fake. Most of the time the camera does not show you the "shocking" stabs, chops, slicing - you just see the aftermath. (They do show a breast hooking in detail). The special effects are just OK. Nothing here that tells you any of the violence is real. The "cannibals" are obviously poor people from central / south America who were dressed up as jungle savages and told to act mean. These people were obviously in on the whole picture to get a little money, or food, or both. Again...just not convincing.

However, like everyone else has said, there is some real killing of animals going on here. That is the extent of the realism. To me, that was more shocking than any gutting, chopping of scalps, or castration, and even then, the animal deaths are not that gory at all - maybe just sad.

The Hills Have Eyes (2006)

Very effective horror

[8/10 · 15 March 2006]

I am not a gore-hound, but I also don't wince very easily at most nastiness in horror films. I do, however, enjoy a horror film where I am not supposed to laugh or find levity with the villains. I can't stand Friday the 13th films, Nightmares on Elm Street, or even the Wes Craven Scream flicks. I personally enjoy the rush of even being a little shocked by scenes or situations in horror films. Therefpre...

Bottom line...this remake of the Hills Have Eyes is NOT a date movie. Trust me, your lady will hate you for making you go see this with her. The film is intense, visceral, and (bonus) not very predictable. The camera does not pull away from the violence or gore. The moments of "down time" for the viewer are usually when there is simply no atrocity being committed. In short, I did not love the film, but only because I'm not one of those horror fans who crave the on-screen violence, blood, guts, etc. The film works - the characters are given enough screen time and depth to make the audience care about what happens to them. They are not "cool ways to depict movie deaths" waiting to happen. And since I feel badly for some of what happens to this family, I can't love the movie.

But man was it an effective movie. You are shocked, repulsed, and taken beyond where most horror movies stop enough times to get your money's worth. Frankly, this is a strong "R" rating, approaching NC-17 (where the film was originally rated). The film does not follow a formula. You cannot predict what happens to whom, nor when, nor how. This film left me feeling a little disturbed. In short, I give it all the credit in the world for NOT being what most horror has been for so long.