153 Reviews
Sort by:
Demon Resurrection (2008 Video)
Rated "R" for Retarded
13 March 2017
Warning: Spoilers
How the fck is this rated so high? So many instances of downright retarded decisions. We will review some point by point. If you're an intelligent person or at least basically reasonable then you will choose the right answers to these simple questions.

If you see a bunch of slow moving demons feeding on someone do you (a) run away or (b) stand there whimpering until they feed on you too. The people in this movie chose 'b'.

If there are dozens of demons outside your house do you (a) go out and charge them with a tire iron or do you (b) stay the fck inside. The people in this movie chose 'b'. I know you're shaking your head, reader.

If there are lots of unsavory demons outside your house do you (a) open the window and stick your head or some other part of your body outside or do you (b) keep the fcking window closed and push something in front of it. The people in this movie -you guessed it- chose 'b'.

If there are dozens of demons swarming an idiot with a tire iron do you (a) wait for them to kill him and then attack them with your little axe or do you (b) run the fck back into the house. The people in this movie -you guessed it again- bully for you- chose 'b'.

Basically, dear reader, the annoying thing thru out the whole movie is how people just stand there or wait there until they get attacked even though they had ample time to take off or do something to help themselves. It is a badly made movie and deserves no more than '3' stars. Love, Boloxxxi
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Horror about dolls that bring out the worst in people
28 June 2016
A serial killer leaves behind a box of "worry dolls" after he is killed by cops. Basically, you tell your worries to a worry doll and supposedly it takes them into itself thus liberating you. Anyhow (yawn), the dolls (4 or 5, I believe) accidentally get distributed while in transit to police headquarters. Not a good thing for the new owners whose fears and insecurities become amplified to paranoia by the dolls.

The good news: Movie could have been longer. But don't take this to mean it was a terrible movie. It was just a straight-forward, "nothing new or surprising" movie. Once you learn about the dolls in the earlier part of the film, your brain just coasts thru some bloody, but unremarkable deaths until the end where there is a little bit of the unexpected. Before I close, let me say this: A human being on fire is not funny. But I think that if in a movie said human is made to run a considerable distance while know. I'm only human, folks! Love, Boloxxxi.
12 out of 17 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Poltergeist (2015)
We must accept that it is the fate of all classics and faves to eventually get stabbed in the ass with a remake-dagger.
16 September 2015
So, another movie classic has been remade to less than rave revues (Surprise!). One reviewer here called this remake "filth" which had me chuckling since as a movie-reference, the term is usually applied to unsavory violence, and/or sex, and/or language. None of which were in this movie. But I totally understand. Messing with someone's movie classic (or song) is almost like messing with their religion. They will go off-the-wall on your ass. I've had some of my own personal favorites re-tooled or re-told, whatever, and I was just as miffed as the reviewer I mentioned. And would myself not be aversed to using terms or language that did not logically apply. Here's one: "Shaft", remade with Samuel L. Jackson. (I forget the idiot who did it). You would not have wanted to be anywhere near me when that happened. Samuel L. Jackson is a fine actor, and a busy one, since he appears in every other movie. But Shaft?!!! No f!!cking way!!!

Do I need to tell you what this movie is about?

On the off chance you haven't seen the original Poltergeist then use the basic or generic model of most ghost horror movies "Family moves into a new home and sh!t happens". The interesting thing here is that this movie would have been received a little better without any association as a remake or "update" to the original Poltergeist. Thus, given a different title and some of the more obvious content similarities removed (like the little girl and the TV, for example) it could have -standing on it's own- done a little better (maybe 5.8, or so). So it's being punished somewhat by fans of the original thru association and comparison. They wanted it to be as good or better. Can't argue with that.

In it's day Poltergeist introduced us to movie imagination and magic that we had not seen before; giving us a powerfully visual and frightening experience of certain aspects or areas of paranormal experience in the same way the original Exorcist did. Fans feel that this remake should have done the same thing instead of contenting itself with coasting along on the coat tails (name recognition) of it's parent. The producers should have accepted the challenge of doing as well if not better and blow us away a second time. Ah well, no point in crying over spilled milk or wasted opportunity.

So how'd this happen?

Well, I'm not sure how reliable my sources are, but one day, while golfing, fishing, or playing tennis, someone felt nostalgic. I dunno, maybe they were telling each other ghost stories on the course, on the lake, across the net, whatever, and someone said "Remember Poltergeist?" and the other responded, "Yeah, it scared the pants off me!" Then looking at each other thoughtfully, one said "Why not do an update?" And the other responded, "You mean a "remake"?" And the person with the brainstorm says, "An "update" showing off modern technology. You know, laptops, flat-screen-TVs, smart phones, black BFFs, know?" This got the other thinking, "You know, it could work. But aren't drones controversial?" And the brainstormer says, "You're right. Sh!t! I really wanted one of those things to fly over the house at the end of the movie and nuke it. The audience would go wild!" They later decided they would work out a compromise. Love, Boloxxxi.
4 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Kruel (2015)
Best viewed as a sedative.
20 August 2015
This movie is as much a relationship movie as anything else: Between Jo (the main character) and her boyfriend and her mom and dad. Horror movie? I'm laughing right now so there's your answer.

After breaking up with her boyfriend when he confesses something to her (The road to disaster is oft times paved with "good intentions", Reader. Dude should have kept his pie hole shut.) and refusing any and all attempts at communications from him, Jo later has an encounter with an ice cream vendor on wheels with a weird painted-on face. She later suspects him of committing a terrible crime facilitated by her negligence. She and her ex-boyfriend go sleuthing (she reluctantly) to see if they can find something on this guy who knows she's been snooping around and decides to target her. The constables don't believe anything she tells them (Surprise!) and have already decided they know what happened.

If you have nothing better to do, this movie is best viewed at home in your underwear scratching your-- (Okay, I'm not going there). Point is, it's a "TV" movie about relationships with mild suspense (yawn) provide by the ice cream guy at the end. Needless to say, this movie was not "my cup of tea" as the saying goes. No interesting dialog, no interesting action, no senseless nudity...... Er, speaking of "senseless nudity", I think I'll go browse my video library. Love, Boloxxxi
4 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
The reporter, the hot chick, the grieving mother, the camera woman. Will their brains and other good parts be eaten by the zombies? Stay tuned.
13 August 2015
At an event where people who have been bitten by zombies are waiting for their anti-zombie injections (which they must periodically take) a reporter, out to make a name for himself in the news business, has an argument with his camera woman over his exploitive and sensationalistic idea of news reporting, and they go their separate ways. She to leave the scene, and he to sneak into a tent to take secret pictures where medical personnel are administering the anti-zombie injection for those who have been bitten. He's present when --for some reason-- the drug does not work and all hell breaks loose. On the run for dear life, he teams up with a hot brunette of the model variety with whom he had an embarrassing encounter earlier to the amusement of his camera woman.

Though this movie is not an "outright" comedy (one with a lot of blunt silliness and slapstick, for example), it is no doubt a horror comedy; played a bit more seriously and deadpan. It has some amateurish flaws of execution, but is more forgivable since it is a comedy and you can't take it seriously anyway. As well, you want to root for people who aren't part of the Hollywood establishment who make a decent effort to entertain you. The main flaw, I thought, was those narrow escapes or close calls where the zombies or bad guys clearly had ample opportunity to bite or do bad things but the would-be victim got away. Some of them doing so after the camera cuts away to another scene during the attack or threat and returns to see them still unharmed.

Nonetheless, this movie is still entertaining and therefore worth your time. Watch out for the live news broadcast with the anchorwoman and her celebrity guest zombie expert. It is reminiscent to me of something you would see on Saturday Night Live, if you ever watched that show. It is well done and funny without seeming to try to be. At the end, this movie seems to promise a sequel. I look forward to it. Love, Boloxxxi.
6 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Ex Machina (2014)
Tech wiz knight meets his AI princess locked away in a secure remote facility.
17 May 2015
The very wealthy creator and proprietor of an internet search-engine innovates an artificial intelligence in the form of a human female and enlists the aid of a young male employee to test it at his remote hi-tech home/research facility thru conversations and interactions to see if it possesses "real" consciousness.

There is little to no action in Ex Machina in terms of fighting, running around, and explosions. This easily goes unnoticed and unmissed by us however, since the general topic of human beings meeting and interacting with something "other" is so entertainingly well done. Almost from the very start of this movie we find ourselves helplessly immersed in the conversations and interactions of 3 persons and 1 "questionable person" within the intimate (focused) setting of a visually captivating hi-tech home/research facility.

Let me introduce you:

Nathan (AI innovator): Direct, outwardly friendly, energetic. A giant ego is evident. As well, one can sense an underlying restlessness and temperament; a dark side. What is he up to? What are his unspoken ambitions? You cannot help but wonder.

Kyoko (Servant, lover, plaything and who knows what else): She does not speak but she dances. And there is a hilarious and incongruous scene (which made it even more effective) having to do with this. Priceless! And the look on Caleb's face... Well if ever there was a WTF look, that was it. Kyoko is however withdrawn; seems always cowed and unhappy. Does this have anything to do with the suspected and unknown dark side of Nathan? Hmmm.

Caleb (Nathan's employee and elected tester of his AI): Has an unusual grasp and insight of AI technology and theory. And so seems very smart, even gifted, where this is concerned. Other than that, he seems a basically decent, ordinary guy-nextdoor-type which is why he is our "point man", so to speak, in the movie. This means that we, the viewing audience, can identify with him more than the other principals.

Ava (AI): You would never know she was a machine if it were not visually obvious in her physical construction. I felt an eerie fascination for her combined human and machine qualities. I believe you will too, Reader. She's at first guarded but polite with our point man. And later, determined, and distressed about some hidden desire and knowledge she possesses.

Enough said! I would not presume to give you orders Reader, but if there is more to you than car crashes and explosions and you love your sci-fi as much as I do, then you need to get your butt in gear and see this movie. Highly recommended. Love, Boloxxxi.
1 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Starry Eyes (2014)
Desperate and ambitious, a woman gets more than she bargained for when she trades sexual favors for stardom.
30 April 2015
What would you do if a long-standing dream was suddenly only a blowjob away? -This is the dilemma of the female lead in this movie who has aspirations of being an actress and a "star". The question of what one would do to get something they want badly is not a new movie question or theme. It's been done and asked many times. Nonetheless, it remains a fascinating question because it is one of those questions that shows who you really are. I have long maintained that many so-called "law-abiding" citizens are only so because they are afraid of getting into trouble; of getting caught. Ergo, if you could guarantee them that they would not get into trouble or be found out there is no doubt these heretofore "upstanding citizens" would be willing to commit a crime. Welcome to the depths of human nature.

I was able to sympathize with the character in this movie. She wants it so badly and has been wanting it for such a long time. The walls of her room are covered with pictures of legendary female actors that she both worships and envies. She would so love to join their ranks. Then miraculously, it seems, her big break arrives. But it requires that she override certain ingrained qualms and principles of her personality and character relating to her sense of ethics and decency. In an ideal world she would succeed on the merits of her acting talent alone without having to do anything unethical and indecent. Things that would not prove her gifts as an actor but rather how desperate and how much of a whore she is should she accede to them.

What should she do?

Should she sacrifice her principles and seize the moment? -Or continue to waitress at "Big Taters"?

Tough question, Reader.

Her friends are no help to her; provide no moral support because they don't seem to have any real vocation or ambition beyond partying, getting high, and talking about the movie one of them would like to make. Therefore, how can hanging out with them encourage her to stick to her principles when they all look like a bunch of aimless, shortsighted losers. There has to be more to life. She was made for better things; for "greater" things. Secretly she pities them and perhaps even despises them at some level. How can people without real ambition judge her? Dare even to look down on her if she does whatever it takes to accomplish something big? The guy in their group who wants to make a movie with her is neither trustworthy or reliable, she thinks. It would be a huge roll of the dice to put stock in someone with no proved talent beyond talk, promises, and getting stoned.

Which brings us back to the blowjob (No snickering, please).

I think you can guess what choice she makes. But it's like striking a deal with the devil who will always try to get more than you bargained with. By the time you realize you've signed over your soul it's too late. I'm just using this as an example since I'm not sure if the people of "Astraeus" (the production company our starry-eyed girl is pinning her hopes on) are devil-worshipers or belong to some other cult. They wear a six pointed star around their necks. Whatever, there is no doubt that there are supernatural doings afoot, Reader.

There is some gore and bloody mess in this movie. Some disgusting vomiting as well (One suspects there was more to that blowjob. Just saying....). I lowered the bar for this movie from the get go. I didn't recognize a soul in it. Must be some independent, amateur crap I was thinking pessimistically. Surprisingly it got better as it went along. The lead actress whom I didn't credit with much ability, range, and sexiness in the beginning began to blossom as the movie went along. I realized I underestimated her and the whole movie in general. Hope you'll be pleasantly surprised too. Love, Boloxxxi.
1 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
A cousin of our favorite shuffler and shambler is discovered on mars
28 April 2015
Warning: Spoilers
FOREWORD: I'm not sure it's possible to spoil a movie that is (in my opinion) 4 stars since the fact that it is 4 stars indicates that it has already been spoiled by the people who made it. However, if you disagree Reader, skip to the next reviewer and we'll get together another time.

After an imposed time limit (caused by preparations to leave mars) forces members of a mars exploratory team to return to base camp, one of them, hiding his discovery of life on mars (some kind of bacteria), pleads for more time outside using the ruse that he needs to check if a sensor is working. Against better judgment, the captain caves, giving him a little more time to go out and check the sensor. Conditionally, he is ordered to take another crew member with him and to return by a certain deadline.

Now at their destination, the deceitful crew member (Glory Hog) is outside doing who knows what while the other crew member assigned to him (Clueless) sits in the mars rover watching perplexed. Meanwhile, back at base camp, the deceit is discovered and Clueless and Glory Hog are ordered to return. Preoccupied (no doubt with visions of fame and glory) the directive is ignored by Glory Hog who shortly has an accident, falling into a hole rife with the coveted bacterium. The effect on the poor sap is "somewhat" similar to the virus that turns people into zombies in earth-bound zombie movies. I think you can guess the rest of the movie. There is desperation, fear, courage, the resident coward, all of that, as the the crew scramble to save their asses from their mars nightmare.

This movie is routine in that it offers no innovations beyond placing the zombie idea on mars. Oh, I saw a mars zombie use a weapon so that's new. They're evolving folks; faster, and now willing to pull a knife on you if it gets down to it. (Heaven help us!) Everything else follows a generic playbook of many movies of the same ilk wherein people are hunted by some type of creature(s). Thus: They run for their lives, hunker down somewhere, try to hatch a plan to get to safety, are impeded not only by whatever-the-f!!ck is after them but also by dissent, cowardice, and treachery in their ranks. Finally they make a dash for it, some make it some don't. If you're a horror vet you know this script. So it's NOT a "must-see" movie. But if you have nothing else to do I found it a "mildly interesting" means of killing time. 4 stars seems just about right. Love, Boloxxxi.
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Damn! That was a close call. -Or was it? Mmmm...
11 April 2015
Synopsis: Foreigner working in India and in a relationship with an Indian woman encounters the living dead.

This movie was never going to get a 10 because the performances were "somewhat" off -but not enough to stop it from getting as high as 8 or even 9 if all else went well (After all, we came for some scary thrills not to hand out Oscars).

Unfortunately all else did not go well.

I think a little more time should have been spent to SHOW as well as EXPLAIN how the zombie virus got to India. This would have made a nice "lead up" and "build up" to the outbreak there (A guy walking in a sickly daze at the very beginning of the movie). The only explanation offered is thru an anecdote told by someone who notices the strange walker. Something about being "bitten by a woman from Somalia". As well, we didn't even get a decent introduction to the main characters so we could know and care about them. Traditionally, in most horror movies, there's a "honeymoon" period before the sh!t hits the fan. Classic are ghost stories which usually start out with a nice introduction to a family who more often than not are moving into a new home. Still, poor movie etiquette, coupled with the somewhat off acting, was not enough to stop this move from getting as high as 6 or 7 if all else went well.

All else did not go well.

What really disappointed me was how badly the "close call" or "narrow escape" scenes were done. They had no credibility at all because you -the viewer- could see how the zombies could have -and would have- bitten the person in their clutches. For example: In these narrow escape scenes the zombie is just about to have dinner when abruptly, the camera cuts away to show an unrelated angle or another scene entirely before returning to the beleaguered victim (A victim we know who should -and would have- been bitten already). A camera cutting away from an imminent event (say, a zombie bite) doesn't stop the event. Only the "recording" of it. If -for instance- someone hurls a brick at your head and it's being filmed, whoever is filming the event can't save you by "cutting away" before impact. All cutting away means is that your head saying hello to the brick will not be recorded and any audience viewing the footage later will therefore not get to see the "obvious conclusion". Thus, cutaways in the editing room cannot substitute for -or represent- a genuine narrow escape or close call.

We, the viewing audience, want "legitimate" close-calls and narrow-escapes. This means that not only do we want to see someone in a tight spot in a movie (because it's exciting and suspenseful), we also want any close-calls or narrow-escapes to be credible. We need to see and believe it was possible. This is what makes it thrilling. When -despite odds against it- the person manages somehow to slip out of a very difficult situation. A "near-disaster" is only as valid as the "escape" part of it since if there is no credible escape, the disaster is not averted. And therefore cannot be called a "near" disaster or "close call" to imply escape.

On the plus side: WHAT THIS MOVIE WAS GOOD AT was the suspense of not knowing WHEN and HOW a zombie would suddenly pop up. Now if only the narrow escape scenes were also done this well. This movie could have gotten a solid 6 or 7 from me. Many times you're able to forgive certain flaws in a movie because they don't take much away from your overall enjoyment. But I tell you Reader, it was hard for me to watch the movie carry on with someone that I know for a fact should now be dead -or "undead"- from an earlier encounter. That's my 2 cents (Okay, it was more than 2 cents, sorry). Love, Boloxxxi.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Little seal chick needs her coat to sing her enchanted song.
30 March 2015
The story is about a little girl who is related to fairy-tale creatures thru her mother and able to become a seal. She also has the ability to rejuvenate many creatures in nature thru the power of her song and so is viewed by them as their salvation. She needs to wear her special coat to work her magic, though, and as the movie progresses this becomes central to it's suspense and drama.

After 30 mins or so of this my interest began to ebb. Notwithstanding, there was enough there to make me see it thru to the end. Personally I felt there wasn't enough here for an adult mind. Most, anyway. Unless this animation was strictly designed for kids 8 and under, I would say both story and artwork was, I think, too "elementary" in their construction. However, I wouldn't have minded the simple, flat, brittle, and abstract artwork (unlife-like in movement and appearance) if there was more creativity, cleverness, and complexity to the story-telling.

That said, Reader, the irony is I wouldn't have minded the elementary story-telling so much if the artwork had given me something to gawk at. Hence, had been richer, more detailed and life-like as, for example, "Ponyo" which was for me pure eye-candy. It also dealt with magic and the sea. If you've seen Ponyo, you know what I mean. If you haven't, and you love animation, then you're wasting time with my review. You need to make tracks and get yourself a copy posthaste for your video library!!! I guarantee you pure pleasure. If you're able, may I suggest you lock yourself away with a large viewing screen with stereo headphones and have your favorite snack handy to take the experience to the next level. And if family and friends wonder what you're doing, let them speculate. "Cadbury", anyone? Love, Boloxxxi.
8 out of 26 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Crawl or Die (2014)
You're better off pulling up a chair to a window in your home and looking out.
16 March 2015
First: I don't want to be too hard on the producers of this video. At least they're not out robbing banks and make an honest living trying -as best as they know how- to bring us entertainment. I would give them 10 stars for that if it were a criteria for rating here. But alas! It is not.

The earth is overrun by the "OVT" virus (Whatever the f!!ck that is) and a special forces unit is given the task of escorting -in their commander's words- "the last non-infected, virus-free, fertile woman alive" to Earth 2. Now he could have just said "non-infected" or "virus-free" but repeatedly chose to compound those two terms (Maybe he thought his team was stupid and wasn't taking any chances in case they didn't understand the meaning of one term?).

This movie is brought to us, we are told at the start, by "Backyard Films" which is something I can well believe. I couldn't make sense of the action in the first part of this video (I can't call this a "movie" folks). Speaking of action, the last two-thirds of the movie is spent in narrow underground tubes or tunnels. One is of some kind of plastic or metal and the other is soil. It gets increasingly cramped. So much so, they can only move an inch at a time WHEN THEY MOVE. If you can't run, kick, jump, shoot -where's the entertainment? What we see mostly is people inching or crawling along like this dull video. After inching forward about 3 inches, the lead chick stops, grimaces, looks around, musters up some incredible inner reserve and moves 3 more inches. And so on, and so on. I kid you not, this is a huge chunk of this "movie".

Maybe the people who made this video knew it was going to get dull once they got to the narrow tunnels, so just before she goes in, the lead Ops chick who has a blonde punk mohawk hair style, and wears knee-high fetish boots with thick rubber soles, takes off her pants and gives it to the doctor to rip into strips for bandage for the injured non-infected "plus" virus-free woman. She's now left wearing some ultra short shorts (At this point I perk up). This could get interesting if the camera guy or gal does his or her job properly. Unfortunately the camera person was "gun-shy", so to speak and didn't give me the angles and close-ups I wanted. Maybe the Backyard people didn't want to appear exploitive. In which case: Why use all of the punk Ops pants for bandage? Could have just used the legs. But they had her strip down to her short shorts and then chickened out once she got in the tunnels.

Now before anyone thinks of me as base, let me say this: If you're going to confine a woman so she can't run, jump, shoot, face-off with that cheap Alien knock-off of a creature -what else is there? If you want to keep at least "some" of your audience, you might as well use your camera to lovingly study the beauty of the female form as she pushes, struggles, and wiggles thru some very tight places. Love, Boloxxxi.
8 out of 17 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Her (2013)
After his failed marriage a man decides to get it on with a computer's operating system.
27 February 2015
From the look of his expensive digs it's hard to believe this guy makes that much coin writing sentimental letters for other people who don't have the words, time, or interest to do it themselves (It occurs to me that a con artist, well versed in bullsh!t, could do the same thing without a college degree). He's not strapped for cash then, this guy. Nonetheless he enters into a "low maintenance relationship". No trips, gifts, clothes, and food to buy for another person. Not to mention any extra for rent and utilities. The guy must be on the cheap in other ways then. Non-material. Skimping on say, the time, energy, emotional-commitment, consideration, and understanding that a real woman would require of him.

I was hoping for a weird, creepy, sci-fi movie. "Man in a relationship with an OS", you could go somewhere creepy with that. Alas! That did not happen! Curses! The OS sounded and acted like a regular woman from the get-go. Even as a disembodied voice it was hard not to think of it as a REAL woman; perhaps one in the dark, at some distance, or on the phone. I would have preferred that the OS didn't sound and act so human -at least not at first. Perhaps it could have evolved in time. By doing it the way they did we lost the "creepy-factor" of a man in a relationship with something that was "other". NOW THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN INTERESTING. Instead, what we got was a man in a "normal-appearing" relationship.

The dialog between man and OS is neither witty or interesting; it's so ordinary it's boring. Reader, you could hear the same thing if you eavesdropped on two people in a budding relationship. AND FOR FREE! In fact the movie was one long chatfest. When the guy is not talking to the computer about his, it's, and their problems (or whispering sweet nothings in it's imaginary or virtual ear), he's talking to his friend about his problems and hers. After 30 minutes of this you might find your eyes wandering to your lap, your fingernails, to anyone in your proximity to see how they're faring, and finally to any available exit.

No one even bats an eye when the guy tells people he's in a relationship with an OS. It would have been a more interesting movie if he was trying to hide it (a horrible secret, the fear of scorn and ridicule, ostracization...etc). We, the viewing audience, would have been like eager voyeurs to the weird sh!t that was going down. F!!cking guy is doing an OS on the sly. Yeahhh!

I didn't even like the characters in the movie. When viewing a movie we want the lead character to basically be "someone we are connective with" for whatever reason. I felt no sympatico for the guy, nor -for that matter- any of the men in this movie who all seemed, well... "ineffectual". And for some reason, they all dressed the same; pants high up over their belly buttons and shapeless, box-like, loafers on their feet like my grandfather. On a younger man I'm not sure what the hell to make of it. It's the opposite extreme of rapper fashion where everyone can see your drawers. Imagine those 2 groups together in the same room milling around making whatever statement they're trying to make with the height of their pants (I cannot help but chuckle at the thought).

To close, let me say this: Her has a high IMDb rating which I don't necessarily disagree with. If 2 people go into a restaurant and one enjoyed the food and the other didn't, who's wrong? It's a matter of personal taste and expectations. This movie did not meet "my" taste or expectations. Love, Boloxxxi.
2 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Taken 3 (2014)
Who is where, doing what to who, and how?
24 February 2015
Warning: Spoilers
In this third outing Mills is out for revenge (or justice, if you prefer) and trying to clear himself as a suspect in a murder. Was hoping this one would be as good as it's predecessors. But alas! I didn't enjoy it that much.

1: The car chase scene was too confusing and therefore frustrating. It takes real skill to do a good car chase scene involving multiple vehicles and events that a viewer can sensibly follow.

2: The reason for said car chase was "lame" and therefore not justified. Bryan Mills had already demonstrated his ability to easily disarm the average Joe or "Joe Cop" earlier in this movie and previous ones. Nonetheless, he allowed himself to be cuffed and led outside to a patrol car thru a dim hallway by one cop. At this point I was on the edge of my seat thinking he was going to do something. No way he was going to allow himself to be "taken" (ha, ha,) into custody. But he went like a lamb with the officer to his car. The car chase scene with him in the back of the police car caused a lot of damage on the highway and innocents must have gotten hurt (Ah, if only he had done one of his quick hand-to-hand combat techniques BEFORE he was cuffed, or even AFTER, while he was being escorted by Joe Cop). But the producers and writer wanted a spectacular car chase and this was the best excuse they could come up with: Bryan Mills MUST forget he's intelligent and would not risk innocents on the road when he could easily put Joe Cop to bed and thus avoid that confusing mess on the highway.

3: Speaking of quick hand-to-hand combat techniques: I have no idea what's being done in those close-up fight scenes. Really. Too many quick cuts (editor on speed?) to figure out if Bryan Mills and his opponents really know what the hell they're doing. Ergo and to wit: if this movie had a good car-chase and fight-scene coordinator we, the viewers, would have been better able to sensibly follow what was happening and enjoy the experience. Love, Boloxxxi.
1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Yet another movie about a wealthy financier of illegal underground fights --to the death.
23 November 2013
Warning: Spoilers
Let's see....

I'm rich, bored, arrogant, maybe "a little crazy", and think I'm a "warrior". What to do? --I got it! I'll hold underground fights to the death! And to make it really interesting, I'll seduce a mild-mannered Tai Chi guy with money and trick him into fights until he's no longer a nice guy; until he turns into a vicious killer. "Why", you ask? I refer you back to the line after "arrogant".

The Tai Chi guy delivers packages for a living and fights in championship matches when they are held. He fights using "Tai Chi" which I personally (and perhaps you) always thought old Asian people did to get some exercise. You've seen it, right? The slow-motion movements? Well the Tai Chi guy (a young guy) has decided to speed things up a bit to great success in his championship matches. His master, an old guy (it figures), is not happy about it. He wants the Tai Chi guy to "meditate" and "direct his chi someplace"....I dunno. Well, like I said, the Tai Chi guy is young and doesn't have time for that sh!t. He enjoys speed and power.

I suppose it's possible to pass the time with this without feeling you wasted it. Myself: I was not too impressed. I thought the choreography was bad as it did not cleanly and creatively show fighting action and techniques as I would have liked. I understand that real-life fighting can be messy, arms and legs flying all over the place doing God-knows-what. But these were supposed to be "experts" and importantly "artists". So I would have expected a bit more finesse instead of the loud yelling and the pedestrian use of arms and legs. Keanu Reeves fought much better in his Matrix movies than in this (better choreography and a younger, more inspired Reeves, I guess). Even the lesser fighters who the Tai Chi guy was able to beat fought better than him and yet when he fought the Tai Chi guy in the grand final he gave the Tai Chi guy trouble which was not at all credible to me. Love, Boloxxxi.
5 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Looking for a low-maintenance relationship?
10 November 2013
Then you could be a necrophiliac and/or someone with a rubber doll under their bed. Think about it: You could come and go as you please with no one to question you. As well, you wouldn't have to talk to your low-maintenance partner if you didn't want to since being dead or made of rubber or plastic they don't care. And what about your financial situation? Good or bad you save some coin since you don't have to pay any extras on food, clothes, presents, trips and your apartment or house utilities. Tempting in these tough economic times isn't it? Hopefully if you decide to go low-maintenance you'll choose the rubber or plastic doll. It's may be weird, kinky, and even pathetic --but at least it's not as sick and f!!cked up as the the other choice which brings me to this "thing" that I saw.

Cheap, uninteresting, mostly indoor --movie? F!!ck no! I'll call it a "video" or "film" (of sorts) about a guy with girlfriend issues (and certainly mental ones too) who finds a female corpse in the woods, throat slashed and blood all over. He whips out his cell seeming about to do the responsible thing and call the cops...then pauses...face kind of twitching as he stares at the corpse. Lord knows what his thinking process was at this point. Anyway, whatever it was it ended with him putting his cell phone away and dragging the bloody corpse home with him where he didn't waste any time assaulting it with his little woody (Even licking the blood on it!).

Being a hard-core horror movie fan I'm always looking for movies to horrify me which this movie did -but not in a good way. I was mostly horrified at how boring it was. I chit-chatted with my amigo thru most of it after the point I described above sparing a cursory glance now and again to yawn and return to my conversation. Love, Boloxxxi.
5 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
The Conjuring (2013)
Recipe for a Haunted House Horror Movie
21 October 2013
Ahh, let me see now.... Where'd I put my recipe book? Gimme a sec, Reader. Oh yeah! Here it is!

Okay. You'll need 1 house. To this house add 1 to 3 table spoonful of f!!cked-up history.

Next, you'll need to add new residents. 1 will do, but I prefer to add a whole family. Included in this family is the obligatory resentful teen who objects to the move. As well, there is the cute kid who shortly begins communications with a "new friend" once the family moves in. And don't forget the family dog that senses that "something ain't quite right". Woof!

This is important reader: Add a pinch of joy and optimism. After all, it's a new home and new beginning.

Now add a 1/2 teaspoonful of curious sh!t that may have a plausible explanation. An unpleasant odor, cold, for example.

This should be eventually followed by 2 table spoonfuls of full-out weird sh!t that cannot be naturally explained away. Seeing things and physical assault, for example.

Immediately add 1 and 1/4 table spoonfuls of panic, fear, and unhappiness, since it now looks like this promising new home and beginning has been shot to hell.

Now generously add 1 and 1/2 cup of desperation.

Quickly add 2 religious experts in the supernatural.

Again add a pinch of joy and optimism (The experts have arrived and the family is comforted).

Now add 10 pounds of terror, supernatural phenomenon, destructiveness, assault, and all-out mayhem.

That's it reader. That's the recipe for a haunted house horror movie. You may optionally (It's your call) liberally sprinkle relief, a pound of joy, and a pinch of optimism at the end. My own preference is to leave that out. Highly recommended. Love, Boloxxxi.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Dear Dracula (2012 Video)
1 October 2013
Dracula is frustrated and worried that most people don't find him scary any more. His obsequious helper Myro tries to convince him otherwise. Regardless, Dracula is still much in doubt. Shortly, he receives a letter from a boy in America stating that he's Dracula's biggest fan; the only fan mail he's ever received. Now if you have thousands or millions of fans you can afford to ignore them. But if you have only "1" --what do you do? You pack your coffin and head for America, of course.

Dracula arrives in the States and at his only fan's house with his coffin on top of a taxi. The boy's grandmother thinks he's a salesman of some sort and gives him grief at the door. Dracula puts the whammy on her ("Look into my eyes".....You know the deal) and thus convinces her to let him in. Needless to say, the boy --"Sam"-- is ecstatic that his hero has come to visit him. They watch some videos together and Dracula expresses his contempt and distaste for the scary figures of today. Later, he and Sam come to an agreement wherein Sam would help him to get his scare back and he would help Sam to have confidence in himself and be more outgoing since, as it happens, Sam is an outcast and the butt of jokes with most of the other kids who thinks he's "creepy" (He's got a pet tarantula named "Webber").

The only thing this cartoon is going to do for most adults, I think, is make them crack a smile in a few places (Unless they have no child in them or no sense of humor). I recommend and think this cartoon is for children, 5 thru 8. That is to say, this is the age range I think that would best appreciate it. MY RATING ABOVE ASSUMES I'M A KID WITHIN THIS RANGE. Now if I were rating it for it's ability to entertain older folks I would give it ONLY 2-3 stars. This cartoon, I think, would fit nicely into a Saturday morning line-up or an after-school special for kids that teaches them self-confidence and not to be afraid to be themselves. I actually watched this thing twice, possibly to give it a second hearing, so to speak, and it seemed even sillier (and therefore more enjoyable) the second time. The kid in me plastered a stupid grin on my face throughout much of it. Love, Boloxxxi.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Ambushed (2013)
Ambitious drug peddling crime pals VS a DEA agent, a corrupt cop, and a drug boss
26 September 2013
Dolph Lundgren as Maxwell is a DEA agent who is investigating drug dealers. However Maxwell and his investigation are not the centerpiece of this movie. That honor goes to 2 criminal friends named Frank and Eddie from whose perspectives this movie chiefly unfolds. Most especially Frank who is a club owner, drug dealer, drug taker and murderer. And this is not the end of his accomplishments: He's also a criminologist, sociologist, economist, dreamer, sage and narrator. And the icing on the cake? He's making it with his dream girl; a college "girl-nextdoor" type.

We know about Frank's afore mentioned scholarly accomplishments because he narrates this movie, talking to us, the viewing audience; even "lecturing", I would say, about how his world works and the world at large. His best bud Eddie is (thankfully) not that deep. Just wants to be a bigshot and have a good time (So school is out with this guy). Frank is ambitious; wants to move up in the drug business and is ruthless enough to do whatever it takes including murder and stepping on the toes of a drug boss Maxwell is investigating.

The drama of this movie basically comes from (1) the doings of Frank and Eddie as they try to climb the ladder to success that dealing drugs can buy. (2) Frank's relationship with his clueless dream girl (Not stupid; she thinks he's only a "club owner"). (3) Maxwell and his investigation into the operations of a drug boss and Frank and Eddie. Throw into the mix a violent, corrupt cop shaking down drug dealers and Max and his team have got there hands full.

I thought the movie felt a bit long because of "dull spots" of conversation in a few places throughout (I would have added another star, otherwise). Sometimes when Frank was talking to Eddie, to his girl, and to us the viewing audience. As well, the 2 chicks in bed; one of them an undercover DEA agent (Frank's paramour, by the way). In this last instance, less talking and more making out would have perked me up and saved that scene. There is rap music in this movie (in case you like it or don't). It started the movie nicely, I thought, but the rest of it -though sounding okay- seemed to me "somewhat" misplaced. Finally: The action is unremarkable but "okay". Dolph as Maxwell is a bit unwieldy but can still get the job done, I think, if you place yourself within range of a fist or leg and wait for it. Or in the event of a chase, don't run too fast. Love, Boloxxxi.
5 out of 17 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
An "amateur experimental video", seems like. --Possibly made by your next door neighbor (Yeah, it's that bad).
21 September 2013
The only way to survive this thing is to hook up with your music player to replace or drown out the annoying music and sound effects. Promptly follow that up by going under the influence of something to make the boring, senseless images seem interesting or disappear altogether.

Almost everything is shot in slow motion to weird sound-effects and seems surrealistic. Language is mainly visual; appearing symbolic as if there is some deeper or other meaning to this crap. So there's almost no talking in it, which might be a blessing if I thought it could get worse. This thing (I refuse to call it a movie) is reminiscent of some dream sequences in regular movies. Except instead of lasting only a few seconds or a minute, it goes on irritatingly for more than an hour.

What is this "thing" about? Can't say, Reader. In order for me to tell you that I'd have to be able to understand rubbish. All I could gather (before I stuffed my player's earphones in my ear and nodded off) is that it's about a street walking vampire woman, partial to thick soled black boots, who resides in a dilapidated abandoned hotel. Usually on her nightly prowls (in slow motion to annoying off-beat melodramatic sound effects) she passes by a stoned-looking pink-haired prostitute. But one night, she changes her MO and stops and snuggles up to the prostitute. "She's lost like me", she says in a voice like an old cassette recording (more stupid effects), then takes her home. Reader, you only need to see 3 minutes of this thing to realize you f!!cked up. But on the off chance you still insist on viewing it after all I've said, at least arm yourself with your player and something to make you not see straight. You'll thank me. Love, Boloxxxi.
17 out of 21 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Devoured (2012)
Tip: Devour this movie. Not the food in it though.
20 September 2013
This movie is for the most part contained within a restaurant where Lourdes works as a cleaning woman to make money for her sick son's operation. We see the restaurant filled with patrons only once (early in the movie) and some close-ups of the chef's gloveless, grubby hands preparing food in the kitchen while people at the other end obliviously lap it up. For the most part though, it's after hours or before hours with Lourdes who is usually alone but sometimes with 2 other people who work at the restaurant. One is her boss, a real bitch who enjoys giving her a hard time. The other, a guy, is a first-class jerk who is always coming on to her and whose function at the restaurant beyond boffing the boss seems to be prepping meat (Don't laugh).

Lourdes is seeing and hearing things and believes the restaurant is haunted. We don't know if she is cracking up or actually experiencing certain things. But since we, the viewers, see things that she does not see because she --for example-- has her back turned, this would seem to be independent (of her) corroboration by us, the viewing audience that the restaurant is indeed haunted. Now when not mopping up, having strange experiences, and run-ins with her boss, Lourdes is (1) On the phone begging her mother to speak with her son. (2) Having personal fantasies --no, not that kind. (3) Talking to some guy she bumped into early in the movie when something spooked her and she ran out of the restaurant. (4) Desperately giving blow jobs and who knows what else to patrons for money (so we inferred anyway).

At the beginning of the movie I was captivated by it's style and anticipatory and intrigued by what was starting to happen with this woman; the things she was experiencing. What was behind them? But then the movie seemed to settle into a routine; her going to work, cleaning up, calling her mother, fantasizing about seeing her son and her friend, run-ins with her boss, and some curious unnatural experiences. I say "routine" because things didn't escalate as quickly as I would have liked. BUT THAT'S JUST ME, READER. You may have a different sense of pace should you choose to see the movie --AND YOU SHOULD, since it acquitted itself very well with a very interesting twist and explanation at the end. Well worth the wait. Love, Boloxxxi.
12 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
You will need to suspend your disbelief that this movie is interesting to watch it.
16 September 2013
Warning: Spoilers
About a woman who disappears after attending a party at a writer's house. The police begin an investigation and later the woman turns up dead. Their attention is on the writer. Shortly after, the woman's sister shows up; the exact "twin" of her sister. The writer and his actress daughter offer the woman lodgings at their house for the duration of her stay. The woman accepts. The rest of the movie is about the tension and attraction between the writer and the woman because they are suspicious of each other. As well, later on, some interplay and tension between the mysterious and provocative house guest and the writer's actress daughter who seems easily influenced, "sexually" anyway.

This claustrophobic story takes place mostly indoors and for the most part in the writer's house --and car. It's all talk, and no action. No one gets punched, shot, stabbed, or even f!!cked. Almost 2 hours of "conversation drama" I'm calling it. I suppose this could work if the conversation was interesting. Perhaps witty and funny. Alas, no. This is a movie, I believe, that is best watched in "15 minute dosages" like a serial soap opera. More than that and you may periodically have to check your heart to see if it's still beating. Yes, dull. Very dull. The "twist" of this movie that's supposed to make it innovative and interesting, I guess, is that the plot, as I described it above, is also something the writer has written. So his fictional story is actually happening with him in it. --Or is it? Who knows, who cares. Love, Boloxxxi.
19 out of 23 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
"Vengeance is mine", saith the lord --and the woman in this film as well.
16 September 2013
This movie is about an aspiring model who is sadistically brutalized. Katie, wants to be a model but it's not easy to break into the business. She believes if she just had a portfolio of photographs that showed off her strong points and potential this would be her best chance of getting someone in the modeling business to employ her and launch her career. Problem: This requires a very good photographer and they don't come cheap. She doesn't have the money. What to do. Desperate, she responds to a posting for "free" pictures. I know, Reader. This can't be good. If our lives can be thought of as "vehicles" then Katie has just made a "wrong turn".

This is a "horror" movie, make no mistake about it. And one not for the squeamish. It involves seriously sub-human behavior. It's also a "revenge" movie and I love revenge movies. I love it when someone comes back; "rises from the ashes", so to speak, to exact punishment. And I love the look on the faces of those that wronged that person. The shock, the awe, the fear. They always babble and plead when they know what is to come. Who can understand their pathology, Reader? They don't mind f!!ckng YOU over but when the tables are turned they start crying and begging. Apparently they can only feel their own pain.

Jemma Dallender playing Katie is very convincing; and I know the role was not easy. While every other type of violence in humanity is given free reign in movies, producers are usually squeamish about the violence of rape because of taboos, controversies, exploitation, etc. So it is noteworthy that the people involved with this film did not shy away from sexual violence as is the usual practice where we, the viewers, are "just to believe it happened" and that "it was a terrible thing" based on what is suggested but not explicitly or graphically shown. I'm guessing that because it's a revenge movie, the producers possibly felt that the violence was "balanced" and so had no fear about what was graphically done to the woman. (Tit for tat, and all that). Anyway, good horror-revenge flick and better than the original I thought. Love, Boloxxxi.
4 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Behind Closed Doors (II) (2013)
Ambushed by Comedy
5 September 2013
What is this movie about? Basically it's about money and relationship problems from the perspective of different couples. Their nexus is a psychiatrist (who is the center of the movie as well) who tries to help them work out their issues. This movie is a comedy-drama (which I did not expect). Heavier on the comedy, for the most part, but gets deadly serious near the end. The comedy comes from bickering couples and people quarreling with each other (Oh, the things they say!). I found out that no one knows how to tell your ass off like a black woman. It's almost poetic the way they put your ass in your place with that little neck action of theirs. I was impressed. After they're done with that strong, smart, sharp tongue of theirs, you can consider yourself cut, sliced, crushed, and discarded.

The story is multi-threaded as you follow different couples and individuals. For sample: With one couple, the man is an ex-con, addicted to gambling and can't find a job because of his felony charge (His situation provided some of the more serious turns of this movie). With another couple the woman is a religious nut and the man is complaining about sex. With another, the woman get's fired from her job and her insensitive, jobless boyfriend is on her case. Their back-and-forth is funny and I had to laugh out loud when they went to see the psychiatrist.

Most people enjoy a good laugh and I'm no exception. That said, it is my usual practice to stay away from anything billed as a comedy (except for animated movies). Personally I find that real-life comedies tend to not be that funny unless they get a really high rating (rare) and would tempt me to take a look. For me, whenever they have a middling score they are usually a disappointment. I'm talking about 5, 6, and even 7 stars. I do not trust these ratings but would see a "serious" movie with these same ratings as well as any kind of animation. I think comedy is harder to do than drama; easier, I think, to do or say something serious than something funny. This is why it's harder (for me anyway) to find a comedy that will really entertain me than any other genre. I feel I lucked out here and I think you will feel so too though I understand that "funny" can be very subjective. Love, Boloxxxi.
5 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Daglicht (2013)
Lawyer finds out she has a brother behind bars and tries to free him. Some want to stop her at any cost.
4 September 2013
This is a TV-level or TV-like "drama in family" movie about Iris Boelens, a young single mother and lawyer, contending with an autistic child and the discovery that she has a brother who is locked up for a double murder --and who has autism also. Not much action (violence) or action related suspense in this movie. It is mainly psychological drama and suspense (thriller, I guess) that originates from this lawyer's dogged search for the truth about her brother and family and the people who want to stop her when she decides to investigate his crime and get him new representation.

Whether or not you warm to this movie depends on whether or not you care about the central character in it and/or the subject matter. Therefore, whether or not you are sympathetic to Iris Boelens and the problems and mystery of her family. Iris is a busy woman, juggling a demanding job and problem child who has been suspended from school. Her mother has a cool, no-nonsense facade but one has a sense that deep down she perhaps cares. She is taciturn; doesn't want to give Iris any info about her newly discovered brother. This leaves Iris no choice but to turn to her trusty computer and perhaps the Dutch version of Google. The movie grows on you if you're patient and has an interesting ending that actually made me say "Sh!t, I didn't see that coming". Love, Boloxxxi.
6 out of 18 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
A Russian reconnaissance squad runs afoul of the mechanically enhanced re-animated dead.
31 August 2013
Another Nazi weird science and hand-held camera movie. So fasten your seat-belts! There's gonna to be a whole lotta shaking going on. This one follows an undisciplined and sometimes comical Russian reconnaissance team as they march, hike, and yeah, stagger and stumble thru German territory trying to get the goods on the Germans for mother Russia. As they progress, they encounter evidence that later becomes horrifying fact that the Nazis are trying to advance there cause with some seriously f!!cked-up science: the re-animation and mechanical weaponization of the dead.

This, Reader, you gotta see. Every kind of scrap, junk or part is imaginatively used in the reconstruction and re-animation of the dead. Now while horrifying, there is also no escaping the comical effect of this. This movie is only scary in the sense that "bizarre killer robots" are after you. It is not scary in traditional creepy and supernatural sense of the dead coming back to life. 2 reasons: The merging of people with metal and mechanical parts "dehumanizes" them you tend to think of them more as "machines". As well, this movie leans towards being an over-the-top dark horror comedy; especially at the end.

Normally I don't like hand-held camera movies or "jerky-cams" as I think of them. However there are exceptions and this is one of them. There is a "real-life or documentary voyeur effect" to these types of movies which is chiefly what distinguishes them (along with the jitters, of course). As well, since the camera person is a character in the movie, it always amuses me that when all hell breaks loose and everyone is scattering and running for dear life, they have to hold there ground and act like the bravest or most reckless person in the world and continue filming or else there's no movie. Sometimes the makers of this type of movie get creative and have the person drop the camera in the excitement of the moment; but note that the camera never stops working and always lands in a position where it can continue filming the action. You gotta love it. Boloxxxi.
12 out of 14 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
An error has occured. Please try again.