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 277,495 times)

DrGediman

Quote from: SiL on Sep 26, 2010, 11:11:04 AM
Quote from: DrGediman on Sep 26, 2010, 11:01:46 AM
Overall, a horribly lame effort for the most expensive movie ever.  1/10
Would if it was. Pirates of the Caribbean 3 holds that honour.

If that's true, then I stand corrected.

Quote
QuoteA Nightmare on Elm Street (2010) - this is the worst piece of shit remake I have ever seen in my life.  0/10
Not seen Zombie's Halloween?

They're both as equally bad as eachother.

SiL

Still a terribly lame effort for the highest grossing movie, though.

Valaquen

ANOES 2010. Easy review - terrible POS.

DrGediman

Nosferatu '79 - note to Michael Bay - this is how you remake a classic horror film.


Pn2501

Quote from: DrGediman on Oct 12, 2010, 11:52:52 PM
Nosferatu '79 - note to Michael Bay - this is how you remake a classic horror film.



You seem to have a pretty good taste in movies, and I had never seen the 1979 version of Nosferatu, so I got a copy and realised it was German and it doesn't have subtitles argh.

DrGediman

There's an English version.  Not dubbed, though.  Apparently, they shot it twice.  Once in English and once in German.  Though I hear the German version is better, as most of the actors are German actors, and hence they say the dialogue better in German.


War Wager

Since I'm a lazy ass, mini reviews sounds like a good idea...

Saw 3D (2010) - 1/5

Complete waste of time. As a fan of the series I've always looked past the gore and self mutilations to find a really well thought-out and and intelligent storyline that connects all the movies together brilliantly. Here, the "plot" has nothing to do with the other six and pretty much consists of spikes and body parts flying out at you for 90mins. Nicely buries and pisses on whatever dignity the franchise had left.

A Nightmare On Elm Street (2010) - 3/5

Yes, I enjoyed this movie. Has an overbearing sense of dread and some genuienly disturbing scenes that a lot of directors wouldn't have the balls to film. Regardless of what critics think, I'd say this is a pretty solid remake that focuses more on what a true monster is.

King Kong (2005) - 4/5

About 2 hours too long, but another solid re-imagining IMO. Great cast, brilliant action and an epic score that really pulls on one's heart strings. How they got me to genuienly care about the giant mass of CG amazes me.

Exam (2009) - 5/5

A brilliant and exceptional British thriller that features some good talents. Going too much into the plot would ruin it, but it has a killer script and tension that's hard to come by in movies these days.

Hubbs

Hello everyone, hope I am doing this correctly so here goes, my reviews on the last two films I have watched recently :) many more to come as I'm always on the ball  ;D


The Lords of Flatbush  (1974)


I have never heard of this film before, came across it whilst reading about Sly Stallone on IMDb and with a cast including Henry Winkler, Perry King (Han Solo auditioner for 1977 classic) and Amand Assante I knew I had to watch. In all honesty I didn't see much in the film that was entertaining or exciting, there is allot of dialog and emotion on show as a group of tough young guys in a Brooklyn gang live their lives over the course of afew weeks (I think). Nothing much really happens accept for much smooching with girls in their parents houses and a marriage at the finale, if you think of the film classic 'Diner' then your on the right track but 'Diner' is much more interesting than this, only watch if your curious to see a very young Stallone and pre-Fonz Winkler (yes this role did lead to the Fonz obviously) which is an intriguing  lure.





Saw 7 (aka. Saw 3D)


Well you all know the score here right, we all know the plot and whats gonna go down so all I can tell you is no surprises anywhere, this film is pretty much identical to last five films accept the first which was a decent original horror.
Not to say its all bad though, yes this is just torture porn for sick people to enjoy haha its almost like a snuff flick, lots of people get killed in even more nasty ways than before (being slowly roasted alive in a large steel drum being the worst for me). I can imagine the director and co sitting around a table for days trying to concock really evil vicious ways to die lol!! abit worrying really.

Anyways there's one thing to be said for these Saw flicks and that's the excellent twist in the tail endings and this is pretty much up there with the best. Every one of these films has always caught me out and made me smile with its clever U-turns which do equal why they have been able to make so many, the final twist or sting in the tail for this seventh installment took me by surprise and was a nice bookend to the story, although it raised more questions hehe
Gotta admit the Saw films are addictive for the plots, even though you know there will be a twist its still just kinda neat. Question is which method of death was the worst from the whole series? if its even finished....

Hubbs

Tangled


Yes this is a kids film so I can't expect to get too involved but I admit I did about half way through. Its a slow starting film really, the story is based on Rapunzel and her hair of course and there for it is abit sickly and boring for awhile, characters aren't too inspired, Rapunzel is made out as a slightly dumb blonde type which was annoying frankly but her little chameleon pet was oh so cute hehe

Flynn the scoundrel or bandit is just a rather dull pretty boy made to look slightly Brad Pitt-ish *yawn* but his mannerisms are amusing at times, this really is the films best attribute, none talking body language, most characters and animals all have some nice amusing little sequences of body language that do make you smile or go 'awwww' in a typical Disney way. The small enemy relationship between Flynn and the Captains horse is nice and the little chameleon pet of Rapunzel will really make the kids squeal with delight :) I did enjoy the lill green fella's cutesy facial expressions hehe

Animation wise this is damn good in all areas as Disney really sticks two fingers up at Dreamworks, I was really impressed with the cgi here, the characters are so so smooth and move with excellent fluid motion, lip sync is very good with the voice work, landscapes look delightful and facial work on the human characters is really very realistic, kudos.

As I said it is a slow burner at first but I did get into the 'action' as things get more exciting and characters bond, I did find the plot basic (of course) but Disney do well to make it work and not feel stretched as 'Rapunzel' is hardly a long storyline. Not so sure about the rather poor film title but this is a solid Disney film, better than previous efforts, and shows they can still compete with the big boys in the cgi universe.

Hubbs

Metropolis (1927)


First time seeing this epic and I will be honest as I usually am, I found most of this very boring haha! I knew it was a silent pic and black n white of course, even better!, but the plot in this is totally not what I expected. I always thought this was a kind of 'Frankenstein' story, creation of a robot, but it turns out its actually partly that but more so based around a religious theme of a woman (almost akin to Moses and worshipped as a saviour) leading the lowly workers to revolt against the high and mighty city planners which then proceeds to turn to a disaster movie and then ends with a Gothic horror type finale in the realms of 'The Hunchback of Notre Dame'.

Its hard to take the whole film in as its very complicated with all its messages, themes and metaphors which are both obvious and hidden, the characters are all very well portrayed and much deeper than you expect as the film progresses although the lack of wording (missing or taken out?) makes it hard to follow and pick up all the information you need, a read on IMDb may be required.

The real reason to watch this film is of course the visuals, stunts and musical score, where to begin!?
The score is an opera, its first rate, top class, its as good as any known Hollywood musical and practically tells the story on its own...which its suppose to do I might add. Every person and every event is recorded with the perfect tune/note/theme tune which guides you along the way as if you were listening to a classical orchestral piece.
The visuals and design of the film are the real stand out spectacles with absolutely incredible special effects ranging from model work to matte painting to create a blend of crafts that truly puts some modern films to shame and this was in 1927 remember! The stark harsh black and white contrast adds to the German expressionism to give it that Gothic, gloomy yet quite realistic feel which I really believe would be lost in colour, the camera angles and forced perspective used to create the towering skyscrapers and sprawling jungle of buildings is simply perfect, you just can't fault it and its so very easy to see where many top directors of the biggest sci-fi and Gothic films in history have gotten their inspiration, but I don't blame them for one minute.
Not only the city impresses, the costumes worn by the city planners and their leader 'Fredersen' don't appear dated too much...just smart basic and believeable whilst the set designs and future work on show are pretty accurate of our age and do look really nice (video phone), the offices and building layouts just look right, liveable, clean and well thought out, much like first impressions of 'Blade Runner'.

All this without even mentioning the near perfect body suit used to create the robot 'Maria'! the sculpture work is iconic and begs to be worshipped! not only does it look like a real working robot but the actress inside gives a beautiful silent, slow performance with hardly any effort used, merely standing and walking but giving everything to the suit to make it work on every level, the scientists lab around her is gorgeous looking too and those now memorable assending/descending glowing halo's that surround Maria as she sits are the icing on the sci-fi cake :) ( now of course the stuff of the classic B-movie)

Not only are the effects amazing but the stunt work during the second half of the film is quite risky and daring to say the least, as the machines crumble after the workers revolt the sets come crashing down in eye widening sequences, the huge props fall apart and chuff out smoke whilst the flooding scenes mix neat model shots with quite large sets and huge amounts of extras used (there are some quite stunning scenes with masses of extras used during the film all without the use of cgi making them very special indeed). Some of the sets must have been vast or at least give that impression, many sequences look like stage sets in a theatre with some props taking up almost all the space with their realistic scale, it really does stun you to see it.

A historic film that defies belief, everything is so well done, such precision work and so old you just wonder how film makers can make such trash these days. The story is boring and alittle hard to follow I have to say, lots of odd images, ideas and character arch's going on which isn't surprising seeing as its getting close to a hundred years old (83 so far) but you watch for the craftsmanship on display, the effects, lighting, camera angles, set designs, models, costumes...all these deserve to be viewed and shown or taught...this is the art of proper film making.

Hubbs

Skyline



Now I liked this film despite numerous numerous bad reports from virtually everyone, yes it has clunky acting and yes the plot has lots of holes but its actually a good fun sci-fi romp. As said the plot has its problems agreed, aliens come down (for no real purpose it seems) to nick every humans brain (it seems) and that's it, there isn't really any other explanation. The aliens themselves are a hybrid of many other movie creatures eg. The Matrix, ID4, Cloverfield, The Mist, Monsters etc... although I admit it isn't easy to create a unique original alien anymore these aren't too bad but maybe the brothers should of stayed away from the usual tentacle option again. So despite the aliens not being too original looking they are effective and do create tension throughout....although how they pilot their space cruisers and starfighters is beyond me lol!!

The effects are a mixed bunch much like the acting, on both counts there are times when they are both pretty decent and do the job well, other times both fare rather iffy and show this up for the cheap B-movie stuff it really is, not that is a problem to be honest as you must accept this as B-movie guff and you will enjoy awhole lot more. Again though I must oppose the mass reviewers and praise the brothers for some neat cgi from the comforts of their bedroom as it is effective if maybe alittle bit close to a videogame in-game sequence hehe

Acting is very average yes but its not as bad as people make out, the cast are unknowns which works well for the film and makes it more realistic (unknowns are always a winner) or that little bit more believeable. Personally I thought all cast members were quite OK, apart from the odd moment or speech with some hammy lines (David Zayas) nothing really detracted from my enjoyment of this 'War of the Worlds' clone. There is a nice sense of being trapped and forced to hideout within the building which many viewers have moaned as cheap or 'weak story telling' but in my opinion it works and the cast do a sturdy job in bringing that across.

A slightly more serious take on 'Independence Day' with added 'War of the Worlds' plus bits of various other films. Its unoriginal with one sequence involving US jet fighters going up against the alien mothership being a total 'ID4' rip but an intriguing little ending which could lead to interesting things in the future even if rather silly, question is why is it called 'Skyline'?

scarhunter92

Quote from: Hubbs on Dec 18, 2010, 04:16:29 PM
Skyline



Now I liked this film despite numerous numerous bad reports from virtually everyone, yes it has clunky acting and yes the plot has lots of holes but its actually a good fun sci-fi romp. As said the plot has its problems agreed, aliens come down (for no real purpose it seems) to nick every humans brain (it seems) and that's it, there isn't really any other explanation. The aliens themselves are a hybrid of many other movie creatures eg. The Matrix, ID4, Cloverfield, The Mist, Monsters etc... although I admit it isn't easy to create a unique original alien anymore these aren't too bad but maybe the brothers should of stayed away from the usual tentacle option again. So despite the aliens not being too original looking they are effective and do create tension throughout....although how they pilot their space cruisers and starfighters is beyond me lol!!

The effects are a mixed bunch much like the acting, on both counts there are times when they are both pretty decent and do the job well, other times both fare rather iffy and show this up for the cheap B-movie stuff it really is, not that is a problem to be honest as you must accept this as B-movie guff and you will enjoy awhole lot more. Again though I must oppose the mass reviewers and praise the brothers for some neat cgi from the comforts of their bedroom as it is effective if maybe alittle bit close to a videogame in-game sequence hehe

Acting is very average yes but its not as bad as people make out, the cast are unknowns which works well for the film and makes it more realistic (unknowns are always a winner) or that little bit more believeable. Personally I thought all cast members were quite OK, apart from the odd moment or speech with some hammy lines (David Zayas) nothing really detracted from my enjoyment of this 'War of the Worlds' clone. There is a nice sense of being trapped and forced to hideout within the building which many viewers have moaned as cheap or 'weak story telling' but in my opinion it works and the cast do a sturdy job in bringing that across.

A slightly more serious take on 'Independence Day' with added 'War of the Worlds' plus bits of various other films. Its unoriginal with one sequence involving US jet fighters going up against the alien mothership being a total 'ID4' rip but an intriguing little ending which could lead to interesting things in the future even if rather silly, question is why is it called 'Skyline'?

I agree with this. 6/10 for me.

OmegaZilla

OmegaZilla

#432
Quote from: Hubbs on Dec 18, 2010, 04:16:29 PM
why is it called 'Skyline'?
For the same reason the second AvP was called Requiem.
It's


*drums*






*More drums*



Spoiler
LOLRANDOM
[close]
That's the only answer.

Hubbs

^ Hmmm well it does look nice on the posters doesn't it hehe 'Skyline' nice word combo.

Hubbs

Starcrash (1978)

So this is probably one of the worst sci-fi films made haha and I don't think it was suppose to be with a cast including Christopher Plummer and David Hasselhoff. Sure they weren't big stars back then, well Plummer may have been known, but this is suppose to be a reasonably serious flick, an equal or challenge to the mighty Star Wars perhaps? maybe Plummer thought this could be his sci-fi moment of glory? alas it was not to be.

The effects are terribly bad and full of inconsistant space battles, costumes are your typical nasty shiny 'Flash Gordon' camp affair, the sets are all flashy neon lights and the acting is rather below standard hehe One or two models and costumes (mainly the robot) aren't too bad and Munro in her sexy skimpy space bikini is nice but apart from that its really pretty awful.

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