Category: Movie Reviews

So I recently got to see the new Bond flick last night… and I liked it.

As a direct sequel to Casino Royale, the story pretty much picks up where that one left off, with Bond wanting revenge for the death of that chick who betrayed him… um yeah, that makes sense. Didn’t he say “the bitch is dead” in the last flick? Um, never mind. Logic aside, the movie has Bond going around the world killing leads all the while trying to get a clue as to who the organization is… or something. You know what, who cares? It’s a movie with some explosions, some action, some seducing ladies to bed, and a lady drowned in oil… because apparently Goldfinger isn’t available to supply gold paint… or whatever.

Despite my snarky comments, I really enjoyed the flick as a sequel. Is it as good as Casino? Probably not… I thought there were a couple of problems with the movie that kept it down a notch. For one thing, the final moments of the film pass by so quickly that you’re left somewhat unsatisfied… and there’re still some unanswered questions that they most likely will resolve in the next film… I know, it’s shameful.

Overall, it’s a good movie and I recommend it.

Recently got to see this one yesterday, which is surprising to me because I didn’t even know they made another Bean movie until my mother told me about it. Anyway, in this movie, Mr. Bean wins a train trip to Cannes and through his various acts, trouble comes a-brewing.

Not being a big fan of Bean and having seen a few episodes as well as that first flick ten years ago, my expectations weren’t all that high. This is pretty much the same Bean you’ve seen on the show and the first movie and that seems to be enough, as it’s still a pretty funny flick. Even ten years removed from the movie when he lasted played the role, that Rowan guy can still pull it off. Of course, there were some dragging moments, but that’s to be expected with a lot of movies.

If you’re a fan of Bean, you’ll want to watch this movie. If you’re not, this is still a funny, well-done film, although I’d advise you to pick up the movie and some TV episodes if you want to get Bean at his best.

About a year ago, the hype machine was started off by a bunch of random Internet users over a film called Snakes on a Plane. Despite not knowing much of anything about the movie, it sounded like a cool movie… and hey, it was gonna have Samuel L. Jackson in it, so it has to be good. Of course, the movie bombed when it came out despite the buzz it had going for it. Those that did see it either loved it or hated it. I didn’t get to see it until recently; a full year after the buzz has died down.

If you’re looking for something deep in plot and characterization, then what the hell are you doing reading a review about a movie called “Snakes on a Plane?” The movie has one of the most absurd plots ever conceived (so absurd that the title says it all) and yet it’s awesome. It’s not a good movie and it doesn’t intend on being a good movie. The reason it’s an awesome movie is because it’s an absolutely terrible movie with a ridiculous plot, a cast of characters so one-dimensional and transparent you really don’t care when they get killed off by the poisonous snakes, and the dialogue. Most bad films end up being enjoyable because of certain aspects and you’d have to turn off your brain to enjoy it and this is one of them. It’s not the best popcorn flick out there, but it’s certainly a better bad-movie than some other crappy bad-movies featuring a popular actor and concept *cough* Catwoman *cough*.

Snakes on a Plane is a good bad-movie and if you enjoy a good bad-movie, then check this flick out. Jackson shines in this flick. Let’s hope that despite the bomb, it gets a sequel.

The Evil Dead trilogy is an interesting piece of business when you look at the grand scope of the whole thing. In the beginning, you had the original Evil Dead film, which was a decently conceived horror flick built on a crummy budget, some amateurish performances, and a lot of Bruce Campbell getting the crap beaten out of him and then covering him in said crap.

On the other side, you have the Army of Darkness, a much slicker film with a bigger budget, but is more of a comedic fantasy film; its horror aspects having been somewhat toned down from that early effort. However, sitting in between these two very opposite films is the middle child of the trilogy, Evil Dead II: Dead By Dawn.

Evil Dead II represented the series’ transition from pure horror movie to slapstick comedy; I believe Bruce Campbell referred to it as “splatstick”. This sequel – a partial remake that retells the first movie but a sequel nonetheless – is more light-hearted than the original and whatever horror elements are used in comic effect. The movie isn’t taken as seriously as it was the first time around and I think that helps a bit as it gives the Ash character some personality instead of just the gutless coward that he was in the first movie.

Don’t confuse light-heartedness with kid-friendly; despite having comic moments, this is still partially a horror flick and there is gratuitous gore and graphic violence. It doesn’t really go overboard however; there weren’t any tree rapings like in the first one. Still, there’s a bit more money put into this one. Bruce Campbell is on the verge of finding that voice for Ash that he’d eventually develop in Army Of Darkness and the rest of the cast that ended up roped into this party turned out slightly better (if not some cliche) performances on this second go-around.

Evil Dead 2 is probably my favorite of the three films. It retains some of the horror aspects that made the first movie memorable while starting to invoke some of Army Of Darkness’s playfulness without leaning into full-bore parody. Army may be the more quotable one, but there’s plenty of good stuff in Dead By Dawn.

Having heard about the series of movies for a while but never having the chance to watch them until recently, I’ve managed to throw my two cents on the cult Evil Dead trilogy. Chances are it’s nothing you haven’t heard before, but let me have my piece.

If you want to know about how Bruce Campbell became a cult figure for his portrayal of the idiot Ash Williams, then by all means, DON’T WATCH THIS MOVIE. The subtleties of Ash were introduced in the sequels (Evil Dead II and Army of Darkness). The original Evil Dead contains no slapstick nor witty catchphrases; it’s a straight-up horror film and one that is quite effective despite its age and cheap look.

The first few scenes are mere fluff pieces that introduces us to the victims… er, I mean, characters. The acting in these scenes are okayish; not the greatest, but not utterly horrific like in other horror movies. Then you get to the actual horror stuff and it doesn’t really let up until the tail-end of the movie. While it is cheap looking (the budget wasn’t really that high), it still tends to be effective even in this day of high-end special effects and cheap gimmicks. For those wondering, Bruce does chickenshit Ash well here, although he doesn’t really shine until the sequels. But let’s not jump ahead.

The original Evil Dead movie proves that you don’t need a billion-dollar budget or high-end production to produce a good horror flick. If you can find the DVD (which includes a few outtakes and commentaries, including a great one by Bruce Campbell), pick it up.

Next up: Evil Dead II.

I remember the hype that went behind this movie. A fairly Super Bowl commercial, a FOX special, a bunch of related shows or something… I don’t remember the exact details, but I remember that there was a movement that was pushing this movie as a big deal. So much hype back in the day…

Back when it was released in 1996-ish, I thought Independence Day was a fairly satisfying movie. It didn’t have the most original plot in the world (aliens attempt to conquer Earth and it’s up to the humans to repel them – where have we NOT seen that one before?), but it was still a thrill to see the special effects, thrilling aerial battles, and whatnot. Some ten odd years later, the movie has lost much of its luster, but not so much its fun element.

Those “exciting” special effects? They still serve a purpose and they’re still okay, but nothing special. The plot is somewhat thin and the slow scenes are fairly slow enough to get you out of the mood. Even the tense moments seem predictable and it’s not due to repeated viewings. Despite all this, it’s still a fairly decent popcorn flick worth killing a night if you have nothing better to watch. It’s not a sophisticated movie, it’s not a masterpiece, it’s just a fun little action flick with aliens and lots of explosions.

Independence Day is worth a look if you’re looking for a quick fix of action movies, but anyone looking for high art should look elsewhere. Good messy fun.

Yeah, so, for some weird, perverted reason that escapes me, I was compelled to rent a copy of John Cena’s hit WWE Film THE MARINE. You may recall WWE making a major push for people to watch this thing when it came out. Hell, you may recall that this was a bit on this humble web space for a time before the joke got tiresome.

Following the release of their first film See No Evil – the greatest horror movie ever made according to WWE – WWE Films begat THE MARINE, featuring then (and still) WWE Champion John Cena as a former Marine named John Triton (real creative in making the protagonist’s first name as the same as the actor’s. I’m sure Tony Danza would approve) who must save his girlfriend from a bunch of criminals. From there, we get a second-rate action movie that seems to rip off every single action movie in the book until the inevitable conclusion. Somewhere along the line, I stopped caring and read a book, which was unfortunately far more entertaining and enlightening.

The good news is that The Marine is not the worst movie I have bore witness to; that (dis)honor belongs to the Halle Berry flick Catwoman… though sometimes I will remember that Ready To Rumble exists, at which point I’ll ram my head against a wall once or twice before the selective amnesia kicks in. However, The Marine isn’t a bad movie in the sense that it’s so bad it’s good. It’s a bad movie in the sense that it’s not really that interesting or even exciting. For every action movie cliché this movie churns out, you can probably think of thrice as many flicks that could pull off the same trick, but better. “Perty ‘plosions” are nice and all, but mean nothing if there isn’t a strong backstory or even a remotely interesting conflict to drive the action. The Marine has neither of these things and it ends up being a ho-hum action film with a generic plot line. Not even the T-1000 himself, Robert Patrick, could save this flick.

I rarely have a good thing to say about Cena because I’m not a fan of his wrestling work, but given some good material, he could possibly shoot out a couple good movies. Those movies aren’t going to come from WWE Films, however. He has the talent and charisma to drive the movie, but the material he’s given is absolute garbage.

If you’re a fan of Cena, just stick with watching his matches and promos on RAW and avoid this movie. Trust me; you’re better off watching his crappy matches than his crappy movie.

The first official release of World Wrestling Entertainment’s film division is a pretty basic horror/slasher movie called “See No Evil” starring Kane, one of their big men wrestlers known for having an intimidating presence, hard-hitting moves, and one of the most convoluted backstories in wrestling. And let’s not pull any punches here; while this movie is promoted as the greatest horror movie of all time (mostly by WWE), it goes without saying that after having seen this movie, I can confirm it as one of the greatest comedies of all time.

Oh wait…

“See No Evil” sees a bunch of juvenile delinquents sent to a hotel so they can clean up. Of course, a monstrous murderer (played by Kane) also happens to be living in this hotel and we all know where that goes. Without giving away too much of the movie plot, this film has all the semblance and structure of an early-1980s slasher flick with most of the clichés intact, but without any of the scares that those films accompany. And that’s sort of the main problem with “See No Evil”. It tries so many of the tricks implied by its predecessors in the genre that it comes off as predictable; veteran horror fans will easily recognize some of the gimmicks ahead of time and even those who have only seen a few flicks should tell what happens next. It’s too generic to be scary.

The movie’s gory, no doubt, but it’s only there for the effect. The dark atmosphere instilled in the movie gives off that feel of terror initially, but as you get towards the end, it somehow feels out of place and gets tiresome quickly. The death scenes don’t come off as gory and horrific as much as they do laughable, although some of them are pretty inventive.

And the acting in this movie is pretty bad too, as the main characters aren’t developed enough for us to care when they eventually do get axed. Some can’t even portray fear properly; they just scream and cry in a vain effort to emote. So when they die, it only adds to the comedy because you don’t care enough about them that you simply consider them the equivalent of Starfleet Redshirts to the monster Kane.

As for Kane, he simply portrayed his movie character the same way he portrays his wrestling character, only he uses axes and hooks instead of hellfire and brimstone. There’s no doubt in my mind that Kane can be a great fixture in the horror genre. He has the look and presence for it; he just needs better material (specifically a script that isn’t written by someone who writes wrestling shows) to work with.

Now, despite what may seem like a harsh review, I actually enjoyed the film. It’s one of those laughably bad movies that you can’t help but sit down and enjoy. My main gripe with the film, again, is that it’s simply an exercise in filming gory kills and doesn’t have any frightening or shock moments. I enjoyed it, but I enjoyed because it was easy for me to laugh off some of what was supposed to be scary moments in the movie. If that happens because it was supposed to be that way, the movie would have been rated higher. But it didn’t. It got laughs because it’s a B-movie and it doesn’t help that the director’s previous experiences was porn flicks and music videos; not exactly overcomplicated things to direct anyway. Nonetheless, I enjoyed it tremendously.

If you don’t mind a fun B-movie or funny horror film, I’d highly recommend “See No Evil.” If you are a true enthusiast of the genre, I’d wait until the DVD comes out before checking it out. Everyone else should probably go watch something else.

The other film that we rented was Be Cool, which was the sequel to a prior movie called Get Shorty, which I’ve never seen. This means that I had no clue what was going on and sadly, this movie doesn’t help much in terms of filling the blanks. Most sequels will at least have some kind of hook for those who somehow missed out on the first movie… especially if that movie came out A WHOLE DECADE AGO!

Be Cool doesn’t do that for newcomers… nor does it do the other thing you’d want out of a movie and that’s be entertaining. That last bit boggles the mind because you have a fantastic array of talented stars on this cast lineup (and even the Rock is there) who could have elevated even the crummiest of scripts, but I guess everyone was just phoning things in because there was nothing here. There are supposed jokes and references to things, but these fall flat and I don’t think even knowing anything about Get Shorty would make these even funnier.

By the halfway point, the audience (myself and a few others in the room) were pretty much done with the film and talking about other shit. There’s no comedy to be found here nor was there anything that we could at least poke fun of. When you can’t even mock a movie for its badness, that film is pretty much doomed to failure and unfortunately, we learned that lesson the hard way.

Be Cool is not a good movie. Avoid at all costs. Stick with the Ice Princess. It’s safe, but it’s at least fun to watch.

We watched a couple movies some time ago and I’d figured that I would share some quick thoughts on each. Nothing major or anything. A typical IMDB quick review that tells you nothing, but considering this is outside my usual tastes, it might be worth something?

The first movie we picked out was The Ice Princess, which I can best describe as the typical Disney story where they make an ordinary girl and turn her into a pretty one that eventually learns a wholesome lesson of sorts, along with the usual trademark story twists that are typical in these types of movies. In this case, an ace physics student revives her old love of figure skating for the sake of a term paper, only to be torn between pursuing her academic dreams and her newly rediscovered passion for the sport she once held near and dear to her heart.

Look, I’m typically not fond of these sorts of films from the house of mouse; they typically follow a formula that they rarely (if ever) break away from and the Ice Princess is more of the same in that regard. Still, I’d be lying if I said that I didn’t enjoy this one. The cast is fairly likeable, the acting and writing is fairly safe and solid, and there’s some pretty slick figure skating routines. Sure, it’s hard to buy into the dramatic bits because this is fairly predictable fare, but still, this was a perfectly enjoyable little flick whose 90+ minute runtime flew by quickly and I stayed awake for the most part.

All in all, good, clean, harmless fun.