Reviews written by registered user

Send an IMDb private message to this author or view their message board profile.

10 reviews in total 
Index | Alphabetical | Chronological | Useful

Predator 2 (1990)
1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:
quality sequel, 13 January 2001

Predator 2 seems like a inferior sequel but that is far from the case. The movie picks up the pace a lot faster than the original, and the fact that the movie is set in LA instead of the jungle is much better i think. There are some excellent actions sequences such as the shoot out in the beginning, but best of all is the one in the appartment block, where the rastas get killed one by one by the predator. This time the predator has more weapons such as a net(which is deadly) and a flying disc. There is a major amount of shooting and firepower in this film, something that films nowadays have lost, I have to say that the original had better death scenes in, and Arnold, but predator 2 is a much louder, faster and more action-packed film which is one of the most different sequels I have ever seen. The only complaint I would have is that I was not satisfied with the ending- that aside this is a good film.

Scarface (1983)
excellent, powerful, 13 October 2000

Scarface is a powerful epic gangster film with has become a classic in its own right. So many brilliant quotes thanks to Pacino who really brought life into the character. His performance was superb. The film was critised for being too violent but the violence has dated badly, but even without the gore scenes the impact of Scarface will still be a memorable one, as who could forget that ending!!! spectacular!!

0 out of 1 people found the following review useful:
sick trash, 29 August 2000

I cannot believe films like this are made and profited on. Faces of death basically tries to give the viewer an insight of death and dead stuff. It's selling point is that it includes footage of real things getting killed like animals and humans. I don't know how much of this c**p is faked, but you keep asking yourself why someone would make a film like this. You are probably wondering why I watched this film in the first place then?. Well just like a lot of other people out there I was curious about what a film like this has to offer, I sure wish I hadn't found out. I like violence, death and gore in movies such as T2 or RAMBO but I know that stuff is not real. Film violence is entertaining but real footage of a cow being gutted or a dead guy getting cut open is NO WAY ENTERTAINING. I skipped though most of this film, as I purchased very cheaply on HK VCD, I did not even watch all of this and now I want to get rid the film entirely. ANYONE tempted to see what this film is like DON'T as I can tell you have to be some kind of sick nutcase if you find this sh*t entertaining

X-Men (2000)
not as good as I thought it would be, 27 August 2000

X-men is one in a very long line of blockbuster disappointments to be released recently. The film is directed by Bryon Singer, who can't make a good action movie. First of all x-men lacks good action set-pieces, even the fight in the statue of liberty wasn't any good. I wanted also to see more of different mutants powers, but obviously the F/X budget didn't stretch that far. The cgi effects were undeniably bad by todays standards. So the film did not enough action, but there were some good points being Wolverene made some good jokes and was the funniest by far, and I liked the open ended ending. I hope the sequels will be better than this.

Godzilla (1998/I)
0 out of 1 people found the following review useful:
not good, 27 August 2000

A brave attempt to bring Godzilla to the big screen. Godzilla was always going to be an ambitious task for any director to work on, and it could have been worse.

Dean Deviln and Roland Emmerich both love working with miniatures and the proof is evident in Godzilla. I did not like the effects that much as all you saw was mainly Godzilla's feet crushing stuff. The CGI was too obvious even in the dark(which most of this film is filmed in), and so too were the miniatures.

After seeing Jurrasic park 1 and 2 Godzilla isn't that impressive, and the scene when the little dinosaurs came out of their eggs reminded me of the raptors in Jurrasic Park. Another problem is that parts in the film are so dumb like how they lost track of Godzilla in New York city. I mean this guy is supposed to be as big as a skyscraper. That brings me onto another point which is Godzilla's scale keeps changing. His size is varied throughout the film. Godzilla ends up being a bit of a mess, but it was a well marketed mess.

Godzilla is the only movie in which the music videos for it are more spectacular than the film itself (namely Jammirquai's and Puff daddy)

the cars the star, 27 August 2000

Gone in 60 seconds contains some of the world's best cars. Gone in 60 seconds is directed by Jerry Bruckheimer who made such explosion-fests like con-air and the rock. So I put two and two together and figured this movie would give me the chance to see some of the greatest car chases since the Blues Brothers, with the added bonus being the cars would all cost over 20 grand. How wrong I was.

I was hoping to see a Porsche being hit by a truck, or maybe a Ferrari being rolled about 10 times then bursting into flames, I'd probably even settle for a Merc to crash head on with a BMW with expensive, metal-crunching results. No such luck. Gone in 60 is a boring Bruckheimer flick (I didn't know there was such a thing, until now) which is permanent build-up and no pay-off.The budget looks like it was spent on renting all those beautiful cars, not on packing them with explosives as it should have been. I thought it was pretty weird to have cast Vinny Jones in this film, as his part as the guy who can't speak was lame and unfunny.

This film belongs under the boring family drama section as it is an insult to call this an "ACTION MOVIE".

RoboCop (1987)
1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:
one of my best films ever, 27 August 2000

Robocop cannot be praised enough as it is one of the most original action movies I have ever seen. The film blends violence with humor, something with not all movies can do well. I cannot believe this film was made in 1987 as it still packs a punch. For any fans of Robocop you must purchase the criterion DVD as this is the definitive Robocop and contains the most graphic scenes which were removed to get get an R rating, otherwise it would have got an X. Makes you wonder how violent a film can be to achieve and X rating only for its violence, well believe me when I say this version is very gory. An excellent film.

Disappointing, 24 July 2000

Even though Mortal Kombat is one of the better videogame movie spin offs, it still is a bit of a disappointment.

Taking a cast of unknowns, except Christopher Lambert as Lord Rayden, was a risky thing to do but all of the actors when in costumes, all bare striking resemblances to their pixallated counterparts. The acting was passable aswell as the plot, but the fight scenes and special effects were mainly poor and the lighting was some of the worst I have ever seen.

Another very surprising thing is the almost complete absence of gore, the one thing that made the videogame so notoriously famous. Redeeming features being good sound fx and a thumpingly good techno score, but overall this one could have gone straight to video.

RoboCop 2 (1990)
6 out of 11 people found the following review useful:
"Roboflop 2", 23 July 2000

This film was a pale imitation of it's predecessor, lacking in the originality and humor that made Robocop 1 such a great movie. Robocop 2 tries too hard to outdo the first in it's scenes of violence going over the top with the gore, and losing the realism and style that the original had. An incoherent badly scripted mess, only worth a look for the last 20 mins when robo goes head 2 head with the super cyborg. It could have been better, but at least it's not as bad as the third.

13 out of 18 people found the following review useful:
One of Seagal's finest, 22 July 2000

I cannot believe this film got such bad ratings as it is one of my favourite action flicks of all time. Marked for Death has Steven Seagal playing John Hatcher a cop whose out for revenge against a gang of Jamaican drug dealers. The film has some terrific action sequences and set pieces, example being the shopping centre fight which really showcases Seagal's talents. This has excellent pacing as well as good location shoots. The score for Marked for Death is amazing, suiting the film so well, giving it the right sinister kind of atmosphere. The voodoo elements were cool, Screwface has to be one of the best villains and the twist at the end is unexpected. The violence in the uncut version is some of the most brutally realistic you can find in a mainstream action flick, with Seagal snapping bones as if they were twigs. Be warned though, like most of Seagal's films, in the U.K Marked for Death was cut badly by the censors so nearly all of the bone breaking violence is now gone, leaving just a standard badly edited action film. If you want to see the real power of Marked for Death then you would be advised get your hands on the uncut versions somehow. The only minor flaw with this film is that the beginning in Mexico is a little ropey, but apart from that the only Seagal flick that Warner bros didn't make but Fox did, deserves a place next to Under Seige 2 as being one of my favourite Steven Seagal films.