Reviews written by registered user
emperor_tom

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

5 reviews in total 
Index | Alphabetical | Chronological | Useful

3 out of 3 people found the following review useful:
The perfect companion for any self respecting Death Cab fan, 27 May 2007

After seeing Death Cab for the second time in June last year i finally decided to shell out for this DVD. Before i felt it was a meaningless DVD designed to cash in on the rising popularity of Death Cab after their appearance on The OC and the success of 'Transatlanticism'. However, after witnessing their majestic professionalism and performance live once again, i was intrigued by how well they interact on stage, and whether the same would be shown on the road.

Perhaps the most surprising thing i learnt about the band was how sociable and humorous they are away from the stage. They always struck me as the kind of guys who were so into the technicalities of their music, that their persona away from it bordered on the arrogant. How wrong i was. The documentary is peppered with anecdotes and opinions, as well as an insight into how they write their amazing songs. Bassist Nick Harmer, something of a quiet individual on stage, is the most talkative and funniest members of the band. If anything, this DVD gives a lighter side to a band renowned for their emotionally intense songs.

Also engrossing are the live performances. Shot on 16mm film, what is brilliant is how intense they are live wherever they go. Each venue is a fresh start for them, and one gets the impression that they play their heart out every single show. My personal favourite performance is 'Company Calls' at the Workplay theatre. The slightly out of sync camera work mixed with the shambolic riff of the song gives the viewer the feeling of being there watching them play. Hats off to Justin Mitchell for bringing such a unique way of filming to our attention.

Overall, this DVD is fantastic value for money. If you've seen Death Cab before you'll be reminded of how great they are live, and if you haven't, this film will compel you to book tickets once they roll into your town again.

41 out of 58 people found the following review useful:
Quite simply, the best comic book movie ever made....., 5 May 2007
10/10

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

One of the best things about Marvel comics, at least the golden age of Marvel Comics, is their ability to blend action, comedy, romance and drama into one beautifully enjoyable piece of artwork. The first two Spiderman films managed to being this beauty to life on the big screen, making us laugh, making us cry, making us scream, but most of all, thrilling us with a perfect display of cinematic goodness. So how does Spiderman 3, advertised as the darkest of the films, measure up ti its predecessors. Well bud, if you thought you'd seen it all, you ain't seen nothing' yet.

For Spiderman 3 is glorious in every sense of the word. From its flashback opening credits sequence to its beautifully underplayed conclusion, the whole film is so full of life and colour that you cant take your eyes off the screen. It is, to date, the only film I've seen where the audience applauded at the end. It should be noted that this was a cinema in a notoriously hard to please part of town, giving an indication of just how well its being received.

In this film we see how Spidey deals with more villains than ever before, and how Peter Parker deals with personal problems beyond anything he ever thought he'd face. Spiderman has become a celebrity in New York, elevating Parkers ego to an unprecedented scale. Meanwhile, Mary Jane is seeing her career take a downturn, being dropped from a promising stage role in favour of an actress who can sing better. Que an hilarious scene where an oblivious Peter tries to build up MJ's confidence by advising her on the perils of celebrity ('kids love me, Halloweens a busy time...'). This film has more heart than the previous 2 spideys, and really makes us feel for the characters.

But its the action scenes that most people will flock to this film to see, and they do not disappoint. Thomas Haden Church convinces as the Sandman, whilst Topher Grace is the slimy Eddie Brock, whose humiliation at the hands of the newly slick Peter Parker, leads to his transformation into the terrifying Venom. The final confrontation on a building site is amazing, the camera skillfully following Spidey as he combats the two foes, with a surprise partner in tow.

So, Spiderman 3 is everything you could ask for from a film. Thrills, chills and spills. And watch out for Bruce Campbells cameo as a french waiter. Hands down the funniest scene of the year so far. Go and see it, you will not be disappointed.

4 out of 7 people found the following review useful:
Reward for anyone who finds Wes Cravens imagination., 15 April 2007
2/10

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

This film isn't the worst film you'll ever see. And trust me, it sure isn't the best. What it is is a composite of every slasher/horror/monster film made since 'Aliens'. It has the same characters (nervous, on edge guy, strong leader who's offed at the very beginning, heroic final girl ala-Ripley), same plot (OH NO! Weve been sent into a weird area with no one around. This isn't suspicious!!! Wait, whats that coming over the hill.....) and most of all, same or similar ending (thank the lord, we've survived. OR HAVE WE????). In short, ladies and gentlemen, it is the stereotypical horror film with subtle political undertone to justify its production.

I read a review in which this film was compared to 'Southern Comfort'. Upon reflection, it is exactly the same as southern comfort with a few differences. Firstly, its setting. Secondly, its excessive violence. And thirdly, its introduction of women in order to make us empathise more with the characters situations. After all, who isn't going to sympathise with a woman being raped by a huge mutant bastard???? Yes, its even stolen Southern Comforts scenes. Team leader being 'shockingly' killed as a result of his own mens stupidity within the opening 20 minutes anyone??? You've got it. Low ammunition supplies forcing them to resort to use of their knives/surrounding objects as weapons?? Yep. Oh, and how about a spot of genital discomfort for the enemy???? Whats that you say? IN the closing scenes??? Oh alright then. Well give you that scene as well.

Honestly, you're much better off watching the only real shocking scene at the start of the movie (woman gives birth to mutant baby) and walking out. There's nothing to be seen here that you haven't seen a million times before. Only difference is its got Wes Cravens name attached to it. Apparently he wrote the screenplay in 30 days. More like 30 minutes from the looks of things.

4 out of 8 people found the following review useful:
Miles better than the original in my opinion...., 24 March 2007
7/10

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

The original 'Hitcher' was, and lets be honest here, pretty corny and annoying. C Thomas Howells performance was irritating and left you feeling like he deserved everything he got. Rutger Hauer was passable but a bit too hammy.

This new version cuts all that out. From the opening 'roadkill' scene to the final shot, the movie does not let up in terms of tension and action. The chase scenes are superbly choreographed and each one is more thrilling than the last (though why they choose to put Nine Inch Nails 'closer' as the music during the big chase is beyond me. Have you heard the lyrics?). Sean Bean is understated in his portrayal of the manic hitcher. He has been doing quite a few horror movie/bad guy parts of late (Silent Hill, The Island) but this is easily one of his better performances. Sophia Bush plays essentially the same character from One Tree Hill, but then thats exactly what shes meant to play. Her 'final girl' transformation at the end is very satisfying considering what her character goes through. And as for the infamous truck scene....well, its there. You know its coming and though its not overly graphic, it does make you want to look away. In fact that whole scene had me biting my nails in, for want of a better word, anticipation. Very well directed.

All in all, a very pleasing and surprising movie. I went in expecting very little but was rewarded with 80+ minutes of tension and excitement. Well worth seeing.

3 out of 5 people found the following review useful:
Smashes the original into oblivion..., 17 March 2007
8/10

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I remember the day i saw the original 'Hills Have Eyes'.I remember how, after being told by my father how great and scary it was, and seeing that awesome poster, i was looking forward to seeing a great film that would blow my mind. What i also remember about that day was how disappointed i was with the film. How i didn't care for any of the characters, how i felt no emotion when they met their demise, how it ended so abruptly and unresolved that i ended up hating the thing.

Flash forward 3 years and i sit down to watch the remake. I was obviously apprehensive, and to be honest things didn't start too well. The first 20 - 30 minutes were nigh on identical to the original, with a modern twist. The turning point came with the graphic brutalisation of the family. I noticed the difference straight away. Unknowingly, i felt genuinely upset for them. The rape scene was abhorrent, and the distress felt by the survivors was raw and hit home. It is a credit to the actors that they managed to act so convincingly that i for one was egging them on to get their revenge.

Ah, the revenge. Well, put it this way. Whether your a horror, gore, or action aficionado, you'll find something in the films second half to suit your needs. The fight scenes were well choreographed with fantastic camera work that puts the viewer right in the heart of the action. The gore was present and subtle enough that it wouldn't make you wretch, but enough to make you wince in pain. THere is also a strong political subplot running throughout the film, so that it makes you think about the US governments nuclear tests, and question who exactly is in the wrong. Are the 'mutants' just a by product of their governments neglect? And the ending was great. It was slightly clichéd (the one sympathetic character gives their life to save the hero) but tons better than the original. It also left it open for a sequel. Though from the looks of the one about to come out it has nothing in common with what the ending of the first one implies.

Overall, this is a film that is perfect Saturday night fodder. Indeed, once i watched it i wanted to watch it again. Be prepared to laugh, cry but most of all cheer on the protagonist as he fights to reclaim his daughter and exact revenge on the mutants that destroyed his life.