Film Reviews - AvPGalaxy's Own Critics!

Started by Secret Hero, Mar 07, 2008, 07:25:42 PM

Author
Film Reviews - AvPGalaxy's Own Critics! (Read 275,286 times)

Hubbs

Quote from: Laufey on Aug 29, 2011, 08:52:30 PM
Great review. I haven't actually seen this movie, only An American Werewolf in Paris. Reading your review, that now strikes me more of a remake than an sequel to this. They sound very much alike at least. Will definitely check this out sometimes soon. :)

OOOO you should really watch the original before the naff sequel, the first film is the greatest horror comedy of them all ;)

Hubbs

Ironclad

Based around the real events of 1215 when powerful Barons of England grew tired of their King and came together to rebel against his rule. This film tells the story of the siege that took place at Rochester Castle in the County of Kent following King Johns decision to break the agreement of the Magna Carta made by himself and the Barons of England and then attempting to regain England for himself.

The film focuses mainly on the battle that took place between the Loyalists of King John and the Barons with whoever they could muster against the strong King. Now I must say straight away that you can't expect the film to be completely accurate and it isn't but for an independant film mainly British made with US assistance this is a very good and fairly accurate attempt.
There are some issues I believe with the historical facts such as the French being involved before the siege at Rochester, the fact that King John actually did take the castle in the end (pretty big mistake there methinks) and I don't believe there were any Danish mercenaries involved at anytime, not sure about Knights Templar's either, so god knows where they came up with that idea for the film and lastly King John was simply a bad king and not a bad person really, this siege was really part of a civil war which turned from a cause of 'more power to the people' to simply a scuffle for the throne and power by the Barons.

Of course the film has been taken down the Hollywood route I'm afraid, think 'BraveHeart', 'Pathfinder' or 'Centurion' etc...and you know exactly what I mean, the film is wonderfully made and shot but there are elements included purely to make the story more enticing to a modern audience. Now although this isn't a Ridley Scott flick they have tried their best to go down that epic route, all the action is hand held cams that shake all over the show to add that feel of raw blood n sweat in the heat of battle which does work. There is plenty of claret spraying n squirting from lopped off limbs and slashes to satisfy the goriest of mindsets and some good catapult action all set on location within Wales to give an excellent murky representation of gloomy medieval England.

The action looks good and its fast n fluid but there are hints of slightly amateurish shots here and there along with examples of basic acting from the extras in battle, if you look closely there aren't that many men in the battles, clever editing, and they aren't going at it hammer n tongs if you get me hehe. Also I should add afew shots using cgi, mainly of the castle, are a touch obvious but nothing too horrific.

The main issue I had was the typical Hollywood approach of having a band of guys all brought together with the usual 'Hollywood recruit' sequence. Each man being of different build and skill, one guy is a strong big fat bearded 'Little John' type, another is common mouthy and devious, another is a top archer, another is just a young lad, another is good with knives and women ;) and of course the hero is a Knights Templar who is an all round kick ass machine. Its just a bit too flash and silly really, of course they need characters the viewer can relate to and cheer for but its almost like a computer game roster for a 'hack n slash' fighter.

Great performances from a very good line up including Giamatti giving a good slimy side to his character despite the fact that King John wasn't really 'a bad guy', Dance is perfect as usual as is Jacobi and Cox again cast as a gruff leader/soldier. Purefoy does whats needed as the strong heroic knight but little more, Mara is cute as a button whilst playing scared and innocent, Crook fits the part for the era with his malnourished appearance, Aneurin Barnard is actually very good as young lad 'Guy' and also looks like a certain 'Hobbit' and finally add to that a couple of cockneys in Jamie Foreman and Jason Flemyng for that typical dirty, gritty, uniquely common English touch :)

Like history? then this is for you, just try to ignore the bits of cinematic popcorn excess ;)

Hubbs

Layer Cake (2004)

Along with Guy Ritchie, Matthew Vaughn is the probably the second biggest director from the UK at the moment with some huge films under his belt, he is also the British gangster film maker of our modern age along with Mr Ritchie having made 'Lock Stock' and 'Snatch' together.

Those two films pretty much flash started the British gangster/underworld flicks back into being and created a whole load of copies in film style and imagery. 'Layer Cake' is Vaughn's attempt without his partner in crime (pun intended) and you can obviously see how that collaboration has rubbed off on him.

The film is pretty much like 'Lock Stock' and 'Snatch' and could almost be the third in a trilogy really, the plot is a hotpot of subplots wrapped around one main plot which all intertwine and work off each other well. Although its very familiar by now in visuals, dialog and concept its still somehow good fun to watch hardcases, fumbling crooks and foul mouthed crime lords all batter each other trying to get money/drugs/women/guns etc...one or the other.

It really is nothing new after the last two big Ritchie films it has to be said with virtually the same cast yet again, bar Vinnie Jones, the same outcomes and the same kind of violence all topped off with outrageously harsh cockney accents. Craig fits in quite well with this world as the well spoken sensible dealer and he does a good job unlike his usual wooden pouting performances, you do want him to win the day and its nice to see someone play a role in these types of films without awhole load of attitude and mouth.

Don't expect anything new to the genre with this as its the same again from Vaughn but its neater, tighter and not as ludicrous as the previous big two Brit gangster flicks, its still a lairy little sod of flick though hehe bosh! 

Hubbs

Outlaw (2007)

British film that basically brings to light what state the country is in these days, how law abiding citizens seem to be let down or failed by the system whilst criminals appear to roam free with little fear of severe punishment.

Its a sad fact that the film is pretty accurate with the type violence and youth gang/hoodie culture that this country suffers and the plot behind a small group of men who become vigilantes against the crime is a very satisfying one. The cast is abit mismatched here for my liking really, Bean is perfect for the role with his butch South Yorkshire, manly, grizzled features and heavy accent but other members of the small gang are less effective and not as believeable despite the fact they are suppose to be weak. Dyer is a totally wrong choice in my opinion as he should be hosting something like 'Big Brother' or whatever, simply not good enough even for this small film.

In general the film is very engaging and keeps you stuck to the screen wanting to see the bad guys get battered, its this primal vengeance that most English people will feel when watching this film as we all know exactly what its like and what is going on in our city streets everyday and this film exposes and bleeds that fact. Problem is the film loses its stride as things progress more towards major drug dealers and then towards the end gets abit silly with out of hand gun battles against police. Its a shame because you really don't wanna see the good guys get involved against the police, you wanna see them kicking hoodie ass and getting away :)

Hubbs

Hubbs

#619
The Inbetweeners Movie

Love the TV series so I was looking forward to seeing this immensely and to a degree I wasn't too disappointed. Its not as good as the half hour episodes but I didn't expect it to be, there are allot of gross moments during the film which are funny but not as much good dialog, I believe the characters aren't quite as good as they used to be really.

The original series was brilliant and allot of that was down to the characters, Bird as 'Will' was the main reason I got into the show with his fantastic performance in the very first episode. His facial expressions, the way he moved and his little quips which were fast witty and you could kinda relate to him. The show has lost that somewhat as its progressed and the film really does show this, there is very little really good funny dialog in the film which is a shame, allot of swearing of course as you would expect but that loses its charm quickly.

So the film is your typical English youth on holiday plot and it does wreak of it haha the type of place they go to, the type of young people there, the look of the area etc...without trying to sound like a snob its all very common, chavy and very accurate on how British youth behave abroad in certain Euro destinations. The plot is really very unoriginal and was done before by Harry Enfield with 'kevin n Perry Go Large' so I was disappointed when I read about it, there is a heavy romantic side to the film too which is nice and expected I guess which does equal the predictable happy ending with the guys all slightly growing up and reversing on their attitudes.

Nothing too much to shout about here really, there are some very funny moments (not many) and there are allot of really gross out moments and cheap laughs. Not as clever as the TV episodes and not as witty but for me this really is down to the fact they aren't in the school environment anymore where allot of the humour you could relate to from your own school days. If you like the TV show then I reckon you will enjoy this but maybe feel disappointed by its lack of sharp bite but I'm also sure you probably know to expect that.

The first series was and still is the best, the very first episode being, for me, the highlight with Bird at his best.





The Football Factory (2004)

Based loosely on a novel and directed by Millwall supporter Nick Love who clearly enjoys hard British gangs and fights you start to wonder if he participated in things like these himself haha. Basically this film is about football hooligans which belong to 'Firms' and enjoy nothing better than to beat the crap out of each other every weekend, whatever your poison I guess ;)

The film is actually pretty decent and does keep you glued to the screen as oppsing firms clash, lets be honest here there is nothing else on offer really, you know its about footie hooligans and you just wanna watch them fight lol, this film mainly follows Millwall and Chelsea.
The plot is reasonably interesting as it follows Danny Dyer and his moral dilemma of wether or not to continue being in a firm, nothing amazingly original and not too hard to predict either but like I said you watch the film for the violence period.

You know what your getting with this so for a footie hooligan flick its probably the best out there with a good cast of your regular cockney lads. Doesn't paint a very good picture of England lets be honest but truth be told we're just a bunch of hardnuts ;)




Chaplin (1992)

Not a huge success upon release and I'm not really sure why as this lavish epic is thoroughly interesting, charming and well made.

Taken a from a point of narration by Chaplin during an interview with a fictional character played by Hopkins the film simply takes you through Chaplin's life from one event to another although with many gaps. I'm not completely up with the life of Charlie but I have read that the film does take artistic license with the truth and of course skips allot of history. This really can't be faulted as my personal view from someone who knows very little about his life is 'does that matter?'

The film shows much of his upbringing from the dirty streets of Victorian London to his first jobs in the US, his breaking through into the business, becoming rich and world famous and his problems upon returning to the UK after the the first World War. Most of his big films are also covered in the bio and show just how much swing he had during his reign, the issue he had with controversial ideas and how his close friendships with top stars of the time like Doug Fairbanks helped him.

The film looks excellent in every sense and every scene but clearly the main attraction is Downey Jr and his portrayal of Chaplin. Not only does he genuinely look like Charlie but he manages to mimic the moves, walk, facial expressions and even the comedic slapstick Charlie amazed us with in his movies. To watch Downey making the classic films within the main film you would actually think Chaplin was still alive today starring in his own bio, amazing work to get it right.

Other cast members all add to the superb film both in their looks and portrayals, an amazing line up of known stars from both the US and the UK ranging from Dan Aykroyd to Diane Lane to John Thaw to Milla Jovovich. Kevin Kline is probably one of the better casting choices as he really does seem to belong in that kind of era, born at the wrong time methinks hehe and his lovely showcase as Fairbanks shows this.

As with any film of this nature some sequences are maybe over the top and heavy handed to create that teary eyed emotion but I guess that is to be expected and required to a degree. Never the less a worthy film from Attenborough that has been forgotten and easily sits in the top twenty of all time bio pics.

RazorSlash

I meant to post this yesterday...


Apollo 18 Movie Review
"There's a reason we've never gone back to the moon...budget cuts"

So, today I caught the 12:15 showing of "Apollo 18".
Now you're all gonna ask me the same thing: What are my thoughts?

Going in to this, I was having mixed feelings. Part of me was expecting it to try
to do its job, and fail to deliver in the end. The other part of me was expecting
it to do its job well, and deliver a tense, unnerviving experience. And in the end..
it does a bit of both.

Warining, this review will contain a plot summary which WILL contain spoilers.
Avoid said summary if you plan on seeing the film.

Spoiler
The film opens up in a similar way "Cloverfield" did. Stating its edited down
found footage and blah blah blah. You get some minor backstory about the astronauts
for about 4-5 minutes, then they go to the moon.
Its a bit boring in the beginning, I'm not going to lie. They just do typical
astronaut stuff while once in a while something in the background will be
highlighted documentary styled. Usually a moving rock or a glimpse of the aliens.
The film really picks up when a body of a dead Cosmonaut is found. It begins to get
REALLY tense from that point on. An astronaut is infected, as you've seen through
the previews, and he begins to realize things. But, being crazy, his way of
handling them is...well...crazy. He realizes they're up there as guinea pigs to see
how these creatures react to humans, and his basic reaction is "OH GOD I MUST BLOW
UP EVERYTHING, I'LL NEED TO TAKE A HAMMER TO THE CAMERAS AND SACRIFICE MYSELF TO
THE ALIENS"
So he goes nuts for a while, and, while they are trying to escape, he crashes the
lunar rover. Heres the alien reveal. The camera flings through the air and crashes.
The footage is rewound and slowed down, revealing a giant hermit crab-looking
thing.
The crazy one runs off, and the not-crazy one just walks around aimlessly for a while.
He find the crazy one, who starts blabbering about how he can't leave.
He gets dragged into a crater, which is the home to these crab things. The not-crazy
one goes in after him, and is attacked. He lives, and finds the dead Cosmonaut's
craft, and tries to fly it. He sends a message to the DOD, only to be told he's too
high of a risk to go back home.
So he just lays there, when this other guy who I don't care about enougn to have
mentioned earlier, tells him he'll bring him back. The DOD then tells this guy he's
a risk and that he shouldn't do what he's doing. He basically just goes "LOLNOPE"
and continues. Then, the big payoff...
moon rocks float up due to the anti-gravity in the Cosmonaut's craft, aaand..
They hatch into baby aliens. They attack and kill this guy, and he crashes into
the other guy, killing him. Cue what the Government told the poeple, and then cut to
end credits.
[close]

So thats the movie.
It does its job well, but it relies SO HEAVILY on tension, it just wouldn't be
the same after the first viewing. The payoff I mentioned is pretty stupid. And
the aliens themselves aren't that interesting, design-wise. It can get confusing at
times, but not to the point where you're completely lost, you'll still be able to
follow the basic plot. But its not really an AWFUL movie, its not great either.

In total, I'd give Apollo 18 a
6.5 out of 10.

And no, "Bad Moon Rising" does not play during the credits.

Hubbs

^ Sounds interesting though,



Revolver (2005)

To be brutally honest I didn't really get this film or follow what was going on after about 30min into it. I know that Statham had been in prison and learning the perfect scam called 'the formula' for seven years and upon release he is out to get Liotta the casino boss. The inclusion of many different characters coming along and Statham being kind of owned by Benjamin and Pastore for most of the film as they help him do something just lost me completely, I really have no clue what the hell the point was or why.

Its easy to think this was just another Ritchie gangster flick as it has all the trademark attributes of this but its not, its much deeper than that surprisingly with a complex plot that twists inside out. It certainly looks swish and elegant with a great cast as you would expect but I couldn't make head nor tail of it, not even sure if Ritchie knew what he wanted with this.
Best character for me was Mark Strong as the hitman 'Sorter' who has that calm deadly silence about him and doesn't look anything like you would expect a hitman to look like, kinda like 'Leon' really.

Hubbs

Fright Night (2011)

Certainly a surprise to hear myself saying this isn't as bad as I thought it would be, lets not get carried away of course as it wasn't anything amazingly good but it was solid.

The film plays out much like the original of course with not much being changed, I didn't like how 'evil Ed' was turned so quickly into the film without much time to build more of his character, there was no emotion to his character like the original, the pain and fear of being an outcast and bullied and then the release of being transformed. I'm also still not really liking Farrell as the main vamp to be honest, the film is for a new modern age of course but I think it lacked that kooky old school vampire charm. Farrell was too flash and was made out to be more of a cheap womaniser rather than a hypnotic stylish vampiric lover. 

Yelchin was decent as 'Brewster' and played the teen well, fully believeable and fit right into the plot nicely, on the other hand again I wasn't impressed with the choice of Tennant as 'Vincent' and the way he played him. The drunk slobbish actor who now presents an ultra Gothic 'Fright Night' complete with long hair, leather trench coat, eyebrow ring etc...in a kind of goth rocker appearance who then simply undresses into 'Dr Who'. Didn't like that a tall really as I prefer the original concept for him being a classic Peter Cushing type vampire hunter.

Cast aside the film did unfold pretty well and was nice and scary with some good creepy effects but not quite as much horror comedy. Although most effects were cgi unfortunately some of them were really effective, Farrell's face in the highway car crash sequence looked top notch as did Poots face after transformation in a slight homage to the originals 'big teethy smile shocker' sequence.

The film is thoroughly corny as it should be with fun vampire moments but the lack of 'hands on' makeup effects instead going with the dreaded cgi was always going to be its downside. The finale shows most of this which does spoil the film really as its no different to any other cgi based vamp flick plus it does tend to go alittle 'Lost Boys' mixed with 'Buffy'. Also a shame about the setting in hot sunny Vegas as that didn't really get my vamp juices flowing haha not really the kind of location for a creepy vampire flick if you ask me but hey ho.

Split right down the middle for me this one with some really nice effects in afew sequences but some bad choices of casting and new angles over the original just not sitting right with me. Oh and the film posters are terribly unimaginative.

Hubbs

Green Street (aka Green Street Hooligans, 2005)

Along the same kinda lines as 'The Football Factory' but nowhere near as gritty and in your face, this film suffers from a slight case of Hollywood glitz.

Not just because Elijah Wood is in it, that is one reason of course, but the violence just seems more coordinated and setup haha whilst the many British actors in the film all have rather hokey cockney accents which are rather forced, some not all.

The film centres around West Ham United Firm 'GSE: Green Street Elite' although the real firm is called 'ICF: Inner City Firm' and follows the guys around as they go to matches and plan on fights with rival firms. Nothing much different from other 'firm' flicks but the added plot of Yankee Wood who slowly fits in against his UK based sisters wishes and grows to enjoy the lifestyle.

No one really that well known in the film accept Wood who is TOTALLY out of place in this type of flick but I guess that's the idea right. Only thing is you simply can't see Wood ever getting tough enough to do what he does in the film, never in a month of Sundays.

Good entertainment but using allot of artistic license and second best to 'The Football Factory' and 'The Firm'....if your into these types of films.

TJ Doc

Quote from: Hubbs on Sep 04, 2011, 06:34:22 PM
Fright Night (2011)

[...]

Even though you're iffy about it, I am surprised. I expected you to be breathing fire all over the place.  :P

Looking forward to seeing it myself.

Marr

Quote from: Hubbs on Sep 05, 2011, 07:56:59 AM
Green Street (aka Green Street Hooligans, 2005)

Along the same kinda lines as 'The Football Factory' but nowhere near as gritty and in your face, this film suffers from a slight case of Hollywood glitz.

Not just because Elijah Wood is in it, that is one reason of course, but the violence just seems more coordinated and setup haha whilst the many British actors in the film all have rather hokey cockney accents which are rather forced, some not all.

The film centres around West Ham United Firm 'GSE: Green Street Elite' although the real firm is called 'ICF: Inner City Firm' and follows the guys around as they go to matches and plan on fights with rival firms. Nothing much different from other 'firm' flicks but the added plot of Yankee Wood who slowly fits in against his UK based sisters wishes and grows to enjoy the lifestyle.

No one really that well known in the film accept Wood who is TOTALLY out of place in this type of flick but I guess that's the idea right. Only thing is you simply can't see Wood ever getting tough enough to do what he does in the film, never in a month of Sundays.

Good entertainment but using allot of artistic license and second best to 'The Football Factory' and 'The Firm'....if your into these types of films.




Better still watch - I.D   Its the best of the football hoolligan films

Hubbs

Green Street 2: Stand Your Ground (aka Green Street Hooligans 2, 2009)

Pretty fun sequel that only has one character from the previous film as it is based around him, not sure why him but obviously the actor was the only guy happy to come back for another crack with this.

Put straight this is simply an excuse for a fight every few minutes lol! almost every scene ends up with someone getting beaten up or guys standing off against each other menacingly. Not much plot wise happens for most of the film accept a crooked prison warden dealing drugs amongst the bad eggs, but then out of the blue near the end the film turns into 'Mean Machine' and we get a goodie prisoner v baddie prisoner footie match.

Can't really say the match looks good as you don't see much footie from the bad camera work and the fact the prisoners just fight....as usual, what a surprise huh. It all wraps up nicely in a bow at the end and really does seem rather pointless despite being an OK film for fighting.

Main issue with the film apart from the lack of proper plot is the fact it looks like the prison is in the US! prisoners wear orange jumpsuits and outside they roam around without shirts on showing their big muscles and tattoo's despite English weather haha. The weather in fact appears to be very hot and sunny all the time and the prison seems to be set in a very sandy dusty almost desert like area, obviously trying to get a 'Texas, middle of nowhere' type feel going on or something which is odd seeing as its suppose to be set in an English prison, I thought it was in the US at first and was confused.

Like meaningless scraps? watch on, look out for Vernon Wells as the prison chief ;)

TheMonolith

North By Northwest

Roger Thornhill (Cary Grant) is mistaken for a secret agent by Phillip Vandamm (James Mason) and subsequently abducted, framed for murder, and chased cross country not only by the police, but by teams of trained assassins. His only hope is a mysterious woman named Eve Kendall (Eva Marie Saint) and even trusting her begins to come into question.

This film displays superb acting. Cary Grant, mostly known for comedies is perfect for our klutzy businessman hero who is way out of his league. He delivers lines more like he is irritated than panicked at what is happening. He DID have tickets to the theatre that evening after all. One of Grant's finest points is facial expressions which he previously did perfect in Arsenic and Old Lace. Here, there is no shortage of such moments, especially his finer points during the famous crop sequence. Grant puts on a variety of "Oh shit" faces during that scene. Just about every one in existence. Eva Marie Saint is a show stopper as one of the best Hitchcock Blonds. She is strikingly beautiful, irresistibly seductive, and unbearably mysterious. This lady would be the dream girl of just about any man I know (including yours truly). She is also not there merely to give Grant a love interest. She is one of the central pieces of the plot, and she pushes it along very well. You don't know just what this beauty is up to until the film is about to draw to a close, and thus she is one of the film's best sources of suspense. James Mason is brilliant as the film's rather dickish villain. Dare I say he is the Hans Gruber of his day, coming up with the same types of comebacks to our hero's occasional wisecracks. He carries himself like a gentleman despite his ruthless behavior towards our plucky protagonist. The final point on acting is the amazing performance by Martin Landau as Mason's chief thug Leonard. Once you see him, you get the creeps. He seems much more dangerous than Mason's character and is at time a downright spooky mother f**ker. The two henchmen played by Adam Williams and Robert Ellenstein who follow Mason and Landau around also deserve notice as some of cinema's best flunkies. Why? Because they don't play it for laughs. When you see these two, you get scared. That is the mark of a good flunky. Jessie Royce Davis as Thronhill's mother Clara also leaves a good impression despite her brief appearance.

The action in the film is spectacular. There are three key action scenes that continue to wow audiences to this day. One is the opening where Thornhill is forcibly made to ingest a bottle of brandy and set out on the road to what the villains hope will be his death. The next is amazing scene where Thornhill evades assassination while at a bus stop next to a cornfield in the middle of nowhere, which culminates in one of Hollywood's great explosions. The final and most visually stunning scene is the chase on Mount Rushmore. Beautifully surreal and an amazing place to set an action sequence. There is fine matte work done here and camera placement is superb to make the monument seem monstrous.

The editing on the film is perfect, as is the case with many Hitchcock films. It is especially strong in the lead up to the crop chase where it is drawn out as long as possible so as to become torture for the audience. Car after car, person after person, silence upon silence until finally BOOM! Action scene. Timing is the key point of editing. If you are one second off, an entire scene can come crashing down. The editing here flows smoothly, each shot being perfectly placed and shortened for maximum dramatic effect.

The camera work is astounding, making use of every tool available at the time. Rear screen projection, matte painting, cranes, dollies. Each angle of the film is a work of art. Just look at how well Mount Rushmore is photographed during the final scene. Each frame is beautiful. Just as much cinema goodness is seen in the crop sequence as Thornhill frantically tries to escape his assassins. Each shot, even during the buildup beforehand, is brilliant. Of all the scenes in the film, that one seems to be the most ageless. It does look like a film that was made last week in the best possible way.

The music by Bernard Herrmann is one of the finest of his career. Once you hear the main theme, it is unforgettable. As usual Bernard Herrmann does Hitchcock proud with his brilliant orchestral arsenal. The theme in North By Northwest is one of the finest that cinema has to offer.

One thing I don't usually comment on is the opening title sequence, but here it has been earned. Saul Bass is one of the finest artists of this area of film, and shows that a title sequence can be more than just a show of words, but part of the story itself. The title sequence begins on a green screen when a series of vertical and diagonal lines appear. The words slide down these lines even as the lines become windows and it is revealed to be a high angle shot of the side of the United Nations building in New York, where a critical scene will eventually take place. If only people still made titles like this.

Alfred Hitchcock is, to put it bluntly, one of the best directors who ever lived. He never did one film that was horrible. At his worst, he was average. More directors should be so talented. His influence on cinema is undeniable, and it is very clear as to why when you see his distinct style. Every shot is made to look good, every prop serves a purpose, every word is delivered beautifully, and every character has significance. What Hitchcock does so well that most directors fail to do nowadays is to generate genuine suspense. He can make a matchbook a horrifying thing, and he does in this film. He also doesn't jump right into the action, but likes to create a good buildup before everything goes mad. The buildup is often more frightening than the event itself, but not in such a way as you feel cheated. He also didn't shy away from Guerrilla filmmaking, getting an illegal shot of the United Nations from a utility truck, with UN security in the shot. The timing he has for each moment of action always leaves the viewer startled and intrigued, such as the conclusion of the above mentioned sequence. He also doesn't shy away from humor, no matter how inappropriate the occasion. When Roger is trapped in an elevator with two men who plan on killing him, his mother makes the otherwise ominous scene deliberately side splitting. Old Alfred was called The Master for a reason. He proved once and for all that film is an art form. He was filmmaking's Leonardo da Vinci.

North By Northwest is one of those perfect films. A masterwork that, if the modern viewer is willing to pull their head out of their ass to see one of those old movies, will continue to thrill for centuries to come. When it was being made, it was called the Hitchcock picture to end all Hitchcock pictures. You know what? It just might be.

TJ Doc

Great review! I love that film. 

If only I had James Mason's vocal cords.  :(

Mr.Black101

Bitch Slap

Where the hell do I begin with this film!! It has no plot, no interesting charcters, even a trio of hot-ass bitches couldn't possibly make this pile of shit worth watching!!!!

Plot

The plot is stupid and makes no f**king sense whatsoever!! It's just a trio of chicks that are doing random shit around some trailer in the ass-end of nowhere, fighting random people and with a lot of flashbacks that make no sense whatsoever. maybe there is a plot, but its so uninteresting and unengaging that i just don't care to look for it. The acting doesn't help either.

Acting

My god, the acting was TERRIBLE!!!! Not a single actor in this movie was convincing. Its like they weren't even trying. Its like hey were just reading the script and just filming them reading it. The acting didn't make me care about any of the characters, that weren't the least bit interesting anyway, and didn't help the plot which already was not worth the effort trying to figure out!!!

Special Effects

The special effects in this movie were alright. When the characters were around the trailer, the effects were ok, but in the flashbacks that basically make up what little plo there is, are f**king TERRIBLE!!!! I can't explain it, they're just so bad, they're cheesy, and... Christ!! THIS MOVIE SUCKS!!! And Lastly, the fight scenes are long and boring!! I've never been bored by action before, but the action in this movie really bored me. I'd rather watch a rock for 2 hours than watch those fight scenes!! Maybe its because I just literally don't care about anything that happens in this movie.

Final Verdict

This movie blows!! The only thing you could possibly look forward to in this movie is seeing the hot chicks naked. And guess what... YOU DON'T EVEN SEE THEM NAKED ANYWAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! NOT EVEN A GLIMPSE OF A TIT!!!! Do yourself a favor, avoid this movie ata ALL costs!!! If you have to kill your neighbour, DO IT!!! Just avoid this movie!!!

Rating: 0/5

AvPGalaxy: About | Contact | Cookie Policy | Manage Cookie Settings | Privacy Policy | Legal Info
Facebook Twitter Instagram YouTube Patreon RSS Feed
Contact: General Queries | Submit News