Change Your Image
Upload An Image
Crop And Save
Best damn movies of all time, if you don't agree with it, you're very wrong:
1. Requiem for a Dream
2. Fight Club
3. American History X
4. Shawshank Redemption
5. Sin City
6. Terminator 2: Judgment Day
8. Pulp Fiction
9. The Machinist
10. Batman Begins
11. The Matrix
12. Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind
13. Ed Wood
14. American Psycho
15. The Crow
17. The Hitcher
18. The Fly
20. Die Hard
21. Oceans Eleven (2001)
22. Taxi Driver
23. The People vs. Larry Flynt
25. Office Space
26. Donnie Darko
27. Animal Factory
30. The Ugly
31. La Bamba
32. Revenge of the Nerds
34. 25th Hour
35. Raging Bull
36. The Professional
37. Million Dollar Baby
Best damn horror movies of all time:
1. The Fly (1986)
2. Pet Semetary
3. The Ugly
4. The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (2003)
5. The Thing
6. Evil Dead
8. The Hitcher
9. Frankenstein (1994)
10. The Lost Boys
11. Army of Darkness
12. Evil Dead 2
13. Ginger Snaps
14. 28 Days Later
15. Dog Soldiers
A Nightmare on Elm Street (2010)
Solid take on Freddy Krueger.
I grew up as a kid watching all the Freddy movies. I thought Freddy was a whole lot cooler than Santa Claus, and I thought he was a lot more interesting. They all have a special place in my heart.
As the series went along, Freddy became less scary. He wasn't scary like he was in the first two movies. He went from being a very scary, very mean guy to just being a scary clown, with more emphasis on the clown aspect. Then he was scary again in New Nightmare. And then he was somewhere in between in Freddy vs. Jason. Either way, Englund was in top form in every single incarnation. So of course, the first thing on everyone's mind is how in the hell will Jackie Earle Haley top what Englund has created. I asked myself that. I had hoped in the back of my mind that Jackie would do for Freddy what Heath Ledger did for The Joker. After watching this, and liking Jackie, I came to the conclusion that nobody, no matter how good of an actor, will ever top Robert Englund. Ever. Heath Ledger didn't top Jack Nicholson as the Joker because Heath Ledger simply was THE Joker. In a sense, the role of Freddy is like the Joker; it goes from simply trying to top an actor to just giving up and realizing that the original actor can't be topped, in which case, you simply have to make it different and make it your own. Which is probably what Haley did. It's like if someone were to try and top Ledger's Joker: It wouldn't be possible, so they just do the next best thing: Make the character their own and give their own awesome take on it; it might not live up to the original, but it can still be a good performance. Simply put, Robert Englund IS Freddy, and the only thing another actor can do is simply give a different interpretation and make it a good alternative.
I really liked Haley's take on Freddy Krueger, and in all, I really liked this take on Elm Street in general. In comparison to the other movies, this one seems to have more weight, it seems much meatier. It makes you think about things a lot more than the old movies did. They do this by giving Freddy a human side, a back story. I'm sure people are all angry reading this, thinking, "Humanizing Freddy, what the hell, what a disgrace, blah blah blah LOL!" He's not humanized in a cheap crappy way. Nothing about the character is really changed, he's just explored more than he was in other movies. It's not like Rob Zombie's crappy Halloween movies where they show Michael as a child and therefore kill off whatever mystique Myers had and shed light on what he was like. The difference is that knowing Michael was human didn't change anything, it was unnecessary. He was a different villain. Freddy, on the other hand, is a person, he's human. His motivations, his thought process, everything about him that is pure evil is taken up another notch and is made a little more disturbing because you know that he is a man, a very, very evil man.
This remake was really interesting to me because they made Freddy a really ambiguous character. Throughout the movie, you're left wondering whether or not he's actually guilty of harming the children. During the first half, it seems very likely that he was wrongly accused, and during that same half, you're left thinking that all of his killing might just be because he's legitimately angry and getting revenge on the kids that got him killed. Even though he's an awful person already, you're still left thinking that maybe he was a good guy. He certainly seemed like a really good guy in the flashbacks. This ambiguity added an extra dynamic to the movie that the original didn't have.
Now when you finally realize that Freddy WAS a really bad man, that he really is sick enough to hurt children and then wanna kill them because they simply told the truth about him, it makes the movie, and Freddy himself, much more interesting and a little creepier. When you're watching the flashbacks, you're left thinking that he might've been a good guy, but when you realize that he never was, you're forced to realize that this seemingly good hearted guy was a very mean, very awful and evil psychopath underneath it all. When you realize that he's relishing and enjoying killing all these kids (now grownup) just because they told on him, it makes him a lot creepier and just completely different in comparison to the old movies.
All the actors weren't really that terrible. Kyle Gallner is pretty cool and he's pretty awesome in most of the movies he's in. Thomas Dekker was pretty good, I liked Rooney Mara as Nancy and Clancy Brown is always awesome in anything he's in. I liked all the actors. Of course people will complain that they're too "pretty" and "modern looking," but really, all the people in the original were considered pretty and modern looking back then too. And also, people seem to forget that the original movie didn't have the best acting either (Englund was awesome though).
Overall, I really liked the movie. It could have EASILY turned out terrible. It's much better than the crappy sequels, and it's a new take on Freddy, and I really liked it. It doesn't tarnish the original, it doesn't try to imply that the original was crap, it's just a new take. I love how people condemn the idea of this but wouldn't object to a bad sequel. But that's just me. Go to the theater and judge for yourself. This is just my take, my opinion.
Score: 8 ½ out of 10.
First half: Great. Second half: The opposite.
Let me start off by saying: I was stoked about seeing Mirrors. I liked High Tension, and I loved Hills Have Eyes. Both were awesome, awesome movies....especially Hills Have Eyes. So of course, again, I was stoked to watch Mirrors, because it sounded interesting, it looked scary, and the guy who made to great horror movies made it. What happened when I finished Mirrors, you ask? I was left disappointed as hell. Very, very disappointed. Which sucks because it started off so scary and so interesting.
Kiefer Sutherland plays Ben, a down and out ex-cop who's battling an alcohol problem and the stigma of killing a man while in the line of duty. While waiting to be reinstated into the police force, he takes a job as a night watchmen at an old, burned down, creepy-ass shopping mall. Of course, once there, he notices insanely scary and creepy things going on inside, particularly with the mirrors inside. He starts seeing disturbing things in the mirrors: People burning alive, grotesque people lying on the floors, crying for help, things of that nature. Since Ben is so unstable, we're not sure what's going on, at least I wasn't. I wasn't sure if all this scary stuff was in his head, or if there was a genuine explanation for all of it. Well, I was wishing that the former was true, because that would've made the movie that much scarier and that much edgier. Instead, the latter was true.
The movie has some really, really scary parts....all of it is scary until they explain why everything's happening. Then you're just left there thinking, "Well, that's not that scary anymore." There's some really crazy gore effects, especially the opening scene and the scene with Amy Smart. These parts, especially the Amy Smart scene, will make you cringe just a little bit.
But after the first half, the half filled with mystery, intrigue, and scary, horrific moments, the movies take a turn down dumbass-idea boulevard:
SPOILER Ready for this? The reason for the all the strange happenings in the movie, i.e., in the mirrors, is because of.....ready?......demonic forces. No psychological reasons, which would've been cool and interesting, but because of stupid demonic forces that lived in the mirrors. Even if they didn't go down the psychological route, they could've at least handled it better and made it interesting instead of just saying, "Bad s*** lives in the mirrors. Jack Bauer's gonna take care of it." When his wife starts believing him and when you know for sure he isn't just crazy and broken, that's when all the interest is sucked away.
Everyone does a pretty good job with their roles, but since the movie doesn't get any deeper than "Bad stuff lives in the mirrors," there's not much to do with these characters, especially Ben, who's a pretty broken and messed up guy. But as the second half comes along, you forget that he's a recovering alcoholic with a pill problem who may or may not be completely insane. When there's no more doubt about his state-of-mind and sanity, the movie loses it's punch and mystery, at least I thought so.
SOME MORE SPOILERS The movie takes a turn for the absolutely ridiculous when all the demonic forces in the mirrors manifest themselves in an old nun. She pretty much turns into a freakin' licker from the Resident Evil games. She starts crawling up walls, jumping off walls, and gets into a physical brawl with Kiefer Sutherland as he tries to shoot her. She throws him through a freakin' brick wall, and he throws her like six feet away from him. I was just thinking to myself, "What the hell am I watching? Is it still the same movie?" This part was so stupid it pretty much ruined the rest of the movie. My God. It was so stupid.
I personally thought they could've done much more with the story instead of just saying "Bad things live in the mirrors." It started out scary, suspenseful, and frightening, but then just ends up being corny and stupid. The only thing that made the last half somewhat tolerable was the last few minutes, which was a little shocking and cool. Loved the ending.
But again, don't take this review as a definitive view on the movie. Go watch it for yourself and you might end up liking it very much. I didn't, even though I really, really wanted to.
Score: 5 out of 10.
Pretty much exactly what you would expect
I just watched Deception, and again, I really wasn't expecting that much from it. In fact, I really wasn't expecting anything in particular; I had absolutely no expectations for this movie. I didn't think it looked terrible, good, or average. I just thought it'd be worth a watch. And, overall, I thought it was worth a watch, but not much else. It's a good movie to see if you're bored one night and decide to just see whatever.
One reason I was kind of intrigued by it was because I had this weird feeling that it might be an interesting movie kind of like The Prestige, even though the only connection these movies have is that they both star Hugh Jackman, and they both involve Hugh Jackman and another guy going up against each other. Obviously, it's nothing like that, but whatever. I figured the movie would at least be really thrilling and I thought it would have some really unpredictable twists and turns along the way. Honestly though, there's not really a single thing in this movie thats surprising. Not once did I say to myself as I was watching it, "Wow, I didn't expect that." Because I pretty much did expect everything. That's not to say it's a bad movie. It's pretty entertaining, but it's just not as good as it could have been.
Ewan McGregor plays kind of a nerdy, shy accountant who one night meets Hugh Jackman's character (Wyatt Bose), a suave, kind of wild Wall Street-type guy who's pretty much the complete opposite of McGregor. Through a series of events, McGregor's character ends up with Jackman's cellphone, and he receives a call from a woman who asks him if he's free for the night. He meets the woman, and through another series of events, he gets caught up in this sex club where he calls random women in Bose's phone, getting together with them to screw them. The rule is that there's not supposed to really be any conversation, not getting-to-know-each other, and they're not supposed to know each other's names. They just get together for one reason only: To screw each other.
Of course, Bose is not who he seems to be. There's something about him, and you already know that right off the bat. Eventually, McGregor's character meets up with a woman (her name's never given, it just starts with an S) that he falls in love with and cares for. Of course, things start to unravel, and Bose reveals that there's more to him than what he puts out.
The sad thing is that you know what every character is going to do. You know what twists the movie is going to take, and you pretty much know how it's going to end. You know every step the movie's going to take, and because of that, it's not exactly thrilling or suspenseful. Bose's motive for doing what he's doing isn't predictable, but it just leaves you with a feeling of "That's it?" You expect there to be much more to the story and to Bose's motives, but there really isn't. It's like, it's not horrible, it's not good, it just leaves you thinking, "That's alright, but that's it?"
Of course, the movie's full of sex...which means it's full of nudity. A bunch of gorgeous, hot women get naked for the camera, and it's pretty damn sexy. Just thought I'd point that out.
The movie was entertaining, and it was made pretty well, but it could've been a lot cooler. It was really well made, the actors were good, Hugh Jackman's character was the villain, but he was really likable, they could've made it more suspenseful and they could've put some better twists in there, but whatever. I enjoyed it enough. But you're pretty much gonna see every single twist and turn a mile away if you go see it. Regardless of that, it's still a nice, solid movie. But eh. Go judge for yourself.
Score: 7 out of 10.
The Ruins (2008)
Pretty cool.....I guess.....
I just screened The Ruins and didn't think much of it beforehand. I thought it looked cool, but didn't really expect anything bad or good. All in all, it was better than most movies of it's kind, and could've easily been worse, but could've been just a little bit better too.
Of course, it's about a group of young people that, by chance, find their way into the old ruins of some old Mayan pyramid thing. When they get there, they're ambushed by the (Mayan?) locals, and pretty much held at the pyramid/ruins against their will. The locals won't let them leave, and stakeout the outside of the ruins with guns and arrows and all that cool stuff. So, really, what's one to do in such a freaky, crazy situation? There's not much to do other than survive, which is what these people struggle to do throughout the movie. Not only do they have to worry about surviving from hunger or dehydration (five people have only ONE bottle of water to ration, plus a a tiny bit of food), but they also have to worry about not only the crazy ass killer vines/foliage that inhabit these ruins, but they also have to worry about staying sane.
Everything that can go wrong pretty much does. The worst things happen to these people. Really. I was watching and every few minutes, I just said, "Wow, that's a bitch. That sucks." Not only do they have to worry about freaky killer vines, they also have to worry about themselves, because one of them starts to go insane and one of them is seriously injured.
I know what you're thinking. The whole notion of killer plants/vines sounds completely stupid. I thought so, too. How was this going to be scary or even kind of freaky? Personally, I thought they handled it pretty damn well. What could've ended up being ridiculous and stupid ended up being kind of freaky. It's not really the vines/plants themselves that are scary, it's just the idea of what they are and what they do to these people that's kind of scary. The scenes inside the pyramid, where it's just wall to wall of this scary crap, was a little creepy because they were everywhere and it was overwhelming and claustrophobic at the same time. The scenes inside the actual pyramid are scary because it's so dark and it's such a confined space that these vines actually were kind of freaky because they were pretty much wall-to-wall. It was an abyss filled with these plants, that mimicked the noises around them, making them that much more creepy.
Of course, the movie's filled with blood. Lots of it. The violence is great because most of it didn't come from the vines like you'd expect; most of the crazy crap was a result of the characters; the presence of the vines just made things worse and nastier. None of the gore is there to really shock you, it's just there, it just makes you cringe instead of yell in excitement, like most movies of it's kind. There's a really nasty scene involving a guy, legs, a hunting knife, a rock, and a hot pan...and it's nasty....
The only thing I was missing from the movie was that it didn't really pack much of a punch. It was just there, there wasn't that much to it. A lot of what happens is sad and effective, especially how a lot of these characters get screwed over, but I would've preferred if there was just more to it. I thought it would've been better if the movie was just an all-out downer, even though nothing really positive ever happens. The characters act like you'd expect, too. They go through every decision rationally and logically, and opt not to do things that they know will get them killed. They react just as you'd expect someone to react in a situation like this.
It's a cool movie because it doesn't take the easy way out like most horror movies do. Bad things happen to characters that you like, even though you kind of hate to see it, because all these characters are pretty likable and interesting. I thought the ending could've packed more punch, because it ended up being too bland for my taste, but that's just me. Even though some unexpected stuff happens, it still could've used some more punch. But eh. Who cares?
This was a pretty cool movie. Could've been a little better, but could've ended up a lot worse, too. Pretty damn entertaining, and some pretty crazy violence.
What a Predator/Alien movie should feel like. Strauss Brothers did an amazing job
I work at a movie theater, so I had the awesome pleasure of getting to dry run this movie (that's projection lingo for "watch movie early"). I just saw this, and let me tell you.....it's Bad-Ass, with a capital B and A, if you didn't notice. Let me explain why this sequel is roughly a jillion times better than the first movie...
Now, anyone who knows about this movie is already familiar with AvP 1. That was directed by Paul Anderson, a man who's been raping franchises for a while now. The movie was rated PG-13, which should already tell you how good it's gonna be (who rates an Alien/Predator movie PG-*******-13?). Turns out, the movie was complete garbage. It looked good, but it sucked for a few reasons: The Predators weren't BAMFs. Two got killed way early, and the last one standing just didn't take care of business like a bad-ass. He had to team up with a human in order to defeat the aliens. Come on now. Second, it was cheesy as hell (thanks to Paul Anderson). The human characters sucked, and overall, it lacked the feel of a Predator and Alien movie. Last....it was rated PG-13, and had little to no blood. It's Predator and Alien! How could it be PG-13? Long story short, it sucked.
Now, we have AvP: Requiem, and Anderson had ZERO to do with it, so that's an early indication it won't be a stinking pile of ass. It was directed by The Brothers Strauss, who directed a whole bunch of cool music videos. These two not only made a movie that looks amazing visually, but they made a movie that felt exactly like a Predator and Alien movie should feel like: Thrilling, bloody, gory, and absolutely HARDCORE. I'm not kidding. Just when you think this movie goes too far, it goes even further, and you're just sitting there, thinking, "Wow, that's bad-ass."
The one difference everyone will notice is that it's rated R, and for good reason. This movie pulls out no stops when it comes to savage and brutal, bad-ass violence. In the first ten minutes, a guy hunting in the forest with his 8 year old boy gets his arm melted off, and he and his son get impregnated by a couple of face-huggers. A few minutes later, they both come to, and guess what? Both their chests burst in bloody goodness. The movie sets the tone within the first ten minutes. I mean, my God, they kill an 8 year old kid in the first ten minutes. That's how you know this movie will be bad-ass and balls-to-the-wall violent.
Unlike the first one, this movie actually has interesting characters that you kind of enjoy watching and listening to. They have personality, and you actually don't really want most of them to die (even though it's beyond bad-ass when they are killed).
The story revolves around the Predator ship from part 1 crash landing on earth, with an alien/predator hybrid in it. They send a lone Predator to earth to "clean up" the mess, and let me tell you, this Predator is a complete bad-ass. If Chuck Norris had dreads, a helmet, and mandibles, he'd be this predator. No joke. This Predator goes around the small town, and hunts down the aliens, killing them off one by one in some amazingly bad-ass scenes. Caught right in the middle of this chaos are the humans, but unlike in AvP, this Predator shows no mercy towards anyone. He doesn't team up with a human, he doesn't cooperate, he goes in, cleans up, kills aliens, and if a human gets in his way, he eviscerates them. The stars of the show are obviously the Predator and Aliens, so whenever a human is on screen and they start fighting, naturally, you're just waiting for the Predator to come back and start killing. But either way, who cares. It's bad-ass.
The action scenes are thrilling, to say the least. Every single action scene in the movie has at least one "HOLY ****!" moment, and the movie is filled with scenes that make you just say, "That's just ****ing insane." For instance, SPOILERS HERE, in the movie, they kill an 8 year old kid, like 30 newborn babies in a hospital (although it's not shown on screen, you know what the hell happened), and an unborn baby while it's in it's mother's belly. I am not kidding. This movie doesn't take the easy way out with characters or events. Characters that you don't expect to live die, and what they do to prevent the alien threat from spreading outside the town is pretty surprising and crazy. This movie is ****ing hardcore and brutal.
The end fight with the Predator and Predalien is awesome. The fights with the Predator and Aliens are absolutely amazing, especially the hospital fight where he takes on like 5 of them. The end of this fight is nicely capped off with an unexpected "HOLY ****!!!" moment. You'll jump the **** out of your seat smiling when you see what happens to one of the human characters at the end of this fight.
If you hated the first one, you'll love this one. If you loved the first one, you'll love this one. It amps up the action, gore, blood, thrills, and just sheer bad-assness by a million. The Brothers Strauss did an amazing job with this movie, not only visually, but pretty much on every scale possible. When you watch this, you feel like you're watching the original Predator again. All it needed was an Arnold cameo, and it'd be set.
This comes out on Christmas. I'm sure Jesus will be happy to get a bad-ass present like this one.
Score: 10 out of 10. It's that awesome.
World Trade Center (2006)
....wow.....what a piece of crap......
I'd like to talk to you all about a movie. A movie that I saw recently called World Trade Center. What's it about, you might ask if you're an idiot. But, if you don't know, it's about the September 11th attack on the Twin Towers, and about two Port Authority officers that went inside one of the crumbling buildings and got trapped under the rubble. Now, a movie with this kind of story and the fact that it's based on a sad story will tell you one thing: You might have to bring along a few boxes of Kleenex into the theater. I thought that I was gonna need a little of the tissue when I saw this. But bruh, let me tell you the only tissue I needed was the tissue for my ass after I s*** myself because of how crappy this movie was. Not kidding.
Now, of course, the movie's story is pretty damn good. The attacks were pretty harsh and sad, and you'd expect that if a movie was made about those horrible events, you'd feel like you got roundhouse kicked in the face so hard that you just have to cry. NOPE. How can a movie with such a powerful story not be sad and touching? With my bad-ass wisdom, I'll tell you how: The movie is so damn pretentious and it tries so damn hard to make you cry that it fails. Even though I'm so ridiculously manly, I like watching a movie that brings on a few tears from time to time, and I expected my eyes to have horrible, water-diarrhea. The exact opposite, bruh, the exact opposite happened. First off, the trailer was more touching than the movie. It was more powerful. The movie itself was close to two and a half hours of nothing. When a character died, even though it's upsetting because it actually happened, you don't feel anything when you're watching it. The movie makes almost no effort to add subtlety to any moments that would normally make you cry. Instead, it's so damn pretentious that it almost forces you to disregard the crappy movie-making and crappy script and just accept what's going on and shed a few tears. Oliver Stone might as well have just walked on-camera, and asked us to cry. Sorry, bruh, but I like my tears to come out naturally, not to be forced out.
It's almost like people feel obligated to act like they're moved by this movie. They watch it, and when they walk out they praise it just for the sake of praising it. They say to themselves, "Wow. What a tour de force, guys." They like it before they even see it. The story of these two officers is pretty moving, but this movie just doesn't make you feel anything other than complete ri-godd**n-diculous boredom. I mean, when you're watching a movie about such a horrible tragedy, and you're not moved or crying, you know they did something wrong.
Of course, people are gonna make comparisons to United 93. I haven't seen that, but I do know that it's an insanely sad movie, and that it isn't full of itself. It might be on a tiny budget, but that's what separates it from this pile. Another thing about this movie was that the cast was too recognizable, whereas in United 93, everyone was an unknown. Now, these actors were cool and everything, but when you're watching this and saying to yourself, "Damn, isn't that cop the bad guy from Blade?", you know something's a little amiss. It takes you completely out of the movie. Any other movie is fine, but with such a true story it's not cool to have big name stars that are easily recognizable.
Now, I know I'm one of the few people that hated this movie. Of course, morons are gonna read this and say, "Ha, well, I guess you have no respect for America or for all those people that died on that day! Why don't you just praise the terrorists?!" Nope. Not true, bruh. I have the most respect for the people that died. What I don't like is crappy movies made off of those stories that fail to be moving, touching, or tear-inducing, which they very well should be. That's what I hate, bruh, that's what I hate.
Let me summarize how I felt about this movie: This movie is like when you're about to go to sleep at night after a hard day's work. You think, "Damn, bruh, this is gonna be a good ass sleep." Let me remind you, sleep is the movie right now. You go to sleep, and then you wake up in the middle of the night with a gut-wrenching stomach ache because you have to take a massive, colossal crap. Boom. The great sleep you thought you were gonna have is now crap. That's how I felt about this movie. I thought I was gonna experience something great and moving, but instead, it got derailed by, yes, you guessed it, bruh, CRAP. You all know what I'm talking about.
Silent Hill (2006)
This movie's story is like diarrhea....it's messy, unpleasant to go through, and all over the place
Let me tell you a little story about today: I usually go for a workout in the morning everyday. Not today. Why? Because I wanted to see Silent Hill before I had to actually go to work, because I wouldn't be able to work out and see Silent Hill and have enough time to get to work. I saw Silent Hill today, I saw it because I wanted to be the first of all the people I know to see it. I went in expecting nothing so that most likely I'd be wowed by anything given such low expectations. Well, let me tell you, bruh, I never went to see a movie at the theater, expect crap, and get exactly that: Crap. That's what Silent Hill is.
Before I went to the theater, I read Ebert's review about how it made no sense. I was like, "Nah, his mind power isn't as bad-ass as mine, I'll understand it." I was wrong. Even mind power as bad-ass as mine couldn't understand what the hell was going on in this pile. Let me explain:
The story is based off of the game, the first one, and it does that well. The movie looks bad-ass, the monsters are cool, and it had the perfect atmosphere. What did Roger Avery and Critophe Gans do with all that? Well, Avery wrote one crappy-ass script that made the absolute littlest amount of sense possible. Let me explain:
In the end, we are told that Sharon is a manifestation of a little girl that was killed in Silent Hill thirty years earlier. Sharon is a manifestation of the girl's good side, and the evil girl in Silent Hill (the one that looks exactly like her) is the evil manifestation. Okay, but here's where I'm confused: How can a manifestation of someone live in a fully functional reality, and how could this manifestation be brought into this reality by an evil manifestation? Now, I'd forgive these things if all this took place in an alternate world, but it doesn't, some of these things happen on EARTH. How? Guess ol' Roger Avery forgot to mention that.
The movie also runs at two damn hours. After first, I was like, "Damn, two hours, that's great!" Then I noticed that the movie sucked, which meant two hours of CRAP. The movie is so damn incoherent and all over the place that you don't know what the hell's going on at all. Why are the daughter and mom in Silent Hill? What purpose do they serve there other than to show off the cool monsters? WHAT?!
The movie is also repetitive as holy hell. Let me explain: It's daylight. Emergency horn thing goes off. Cool monsters come. Gets dark. Horn goes off. Daylight comes back. Repeat. That's basically it. While the movie looks cool as hell, it never stops and explains what could be a complex and cool plot. Instead, it just has a plot, and scenes that are more confusing than the one that came before it. What's worse is that none of these scenes explain ANYTHING AT ALL.
People can give their interpretations and THEIR explanations, but the movie itself did not explain jack. If this were a truly good movie, it'd explain what happened within it's run time, while still letting viewers give their own interpretation. That's what Jacob's Ladder did.
Cristophe Gans also said that this is a part of a saga, which is why it made no sense. Come on, bruh, that's no excuse to skimp on a movie's story structure and story development. It's just cheap and it says how clever-less you and the writer are.
The movie also wasn't scary AT ALL. The games were scary as hell.
I should bring this up for fun, too: Roger Avery says that former friend Quentin Tarantino stole all his ideas and took credit for them. After seeing Tarantino's work and Avery's, I highly, highly doubt that Tarantino would steal from a guy who wrote this incoherent, messy, diarrhea-like turd. I hope Avery's reading this part. Now, the movie looks good and follows the game, something most adaptations don't do, but it still sucked. Silent Hill 2 would have made a better movie, just so long as it was handled by a more skilled writer.
This movie...is like diarrhea. It's unpleasant to look at, it's messy, and like diarrhea, it's all over the place. That pretty much sums up the movie and it's incoherent story.
Score: 2 out of 10.
Sorry, bruh, but this movie sucked. Go watch Doom. I'm expecting the following above this review: "0 out of 10,000 people found this review helpful." Why? Because those that like this movie don't want to admit it makes no sense whatsoever. My God, how hard is it to make a decent video game-to-movie adaptation? It works for books and comics.
The Virgin Suicides (1999)
Should be retitled The Dumbass Suicides......
Yes, you read it right. The Virgin Suicides, although a decent movie, should be retitled The Dumbass Suicides, because that's exactly what it depicts: Dumbasses who commit suicide because they're dumbasses.
The movies about a group of sisters, five of them to be exact, who live in a pretty strict house. Not I'll beat-your-ass-if-you-don't-eat-that-food-at-a-sixty three-degree-angle strict, but pretty strict. The girls are kept in the house because the parents, namely the somewhat stupid mom, are paranoid of the forces outside the house, and by forces, I mean school, and other people. The husband played by James Woods doesn't seem that bad, but he just follows in the footsteps of his wife, most likely for fear of getting his ass beaten. Now, these parents aren't the best out there, but they lay down the damn law. They don't want the girls to go outside? Don't go outside. But nope, these girls are stupid.
The first sister to attempt suicide, named Cecilia, tries to slit her wrists. When asked why she did it, she tells the doctor (played by Danny Devito) "Obviously, you've never been a thirteen year old girl." When I heard this, I wished that Danny Devito would just give her a massive roundhouse kick to the mouth, because this character is just a complete dumbass. You've never been a thirteen year old girl? What's so harsh about being thirteen that would force yourself to cut your wrists? The house that you live in that you don't even pay for? All the food you can eat that you don't have to spend a dime on? A bed? A TV? What? What am I missing? Last time I checked, these were all good things, dumbass.
Then after that, I'm not too sure what happens because I haven't seen this in months. But, the girls are invited to a school dance thing by a group of dudes who drool over them. The oldest sister, I don't know her name, stays out all night and gets porked on the football field while drinking. Then when she gets home, the parents force the girls to stay in the house no matter what. First, what did this dumbass expect when she came home after a night of drinking and screwing? I'm all for screwing, but please, don't expect your parents to go easy on you when they told you not to come home late.
Eventually, these girls get a plane ticket to an island where death is inevitable. See what I did there with that wittiness? They selfishly kill themselves because they can't leave the house. Sure, that's a good way to go. Forget the pain you'll cause your parents, forget the fact that you have your whole life ahead of you, just kill yourself because your mom burnt your records that SHE paid for and because you can't go out and have sex with every person you see. I'm not saying this movie's bad, I'm just saying I hate the main characters because they're all stupid.
I guarantee, someone's reading this and saying, "How can you be so cold?! You don't know what these girls are going through, you don't know what could possibly bring on the desire for suicide!" Yes, I do know what brings on the desire for suicide: Idiocy, and weakness. There are better ways to cope with life's problems, taking a gun and putting it in your mouth isn't one of them.
Aside from the stupid main characters, this movie was alright. I don't know if it asks you to feel sorry for them. I don't. I feel sorry for their parents for having such dumbass daughters. Obviously, the movie doesn't endorse suicide, but if it tries to create sympathy for these characters, it failed, with a capital F.
The acting is pretty good too. I thought I should say that.
Now, in one scene, the mom burns one of the daughter's records. I don't mind this scene, because the mom paid for the records and I'm not too much of a fan of the bands. But, if the mom had burnt a Gwar record, bruh, I would have probably felt sorry for that girl. But that's not the case.
I expect to see the following above this review: 0 out of 1000 people found this review helpful. Although, I could be wrong.
Several people will read this and think I'm a cold, uncaring person. That's not true. I'm not a cold person, I'm just intolerant of idiots....and this movie's full of em'.
Score: 8 out of 10.
There's blood, gore, guns, action, explosions, chainsaws, what more could you ask for? WHAT MORE?!?!
This movie, Doom, is based off a the video game of the same name. Most of it's story is taken from Doom 3. Now, I didn't like Doom 3 because it was a boring, repetitive, and mediocre piece of rotten Caesar salad with ranch dressing and a dash of parmesan cheese. It was mediocre. Now, this movie, is basically based off of Doom 3, and let me tell you, bruh, it's probably the most bad-ass video game adaptation I've ever seen. You have everything you need in an action/horror movie: Blood (there's lot's of it), gore (lot's of it), guns (lot's of em'), disgusting monsters (lot's of em'), explosions, fight scenes, and a really Big F****** Gun that'll make you mess yourself if you got shot by it.
The movie is about a group of soldiers who are taken to this weird facility because something's gone terribly wrong. When they get there, they find everyone there, but they're all crazy monsters. So, what are soldiers to do in this situation? That's right. Shoot and blow s*** up as much as you can and that's what they do in this movie.
Now, The Rock isn't really a main character, but he might as well be since he's the most noticeable. He plays Sarge, the leader of the group of soldiers, and as the movie goes along, he starts to get crazy and psychotic, which is a huge surprise since it's The Rock. Luckily, he's armed with the BFG (Big F****** Gun), but sadly, he only shoots it about five times. Instead, he shoot have shot it about a thousand. What did disappoint me is that he barely shot any monsters with it. Instead, all the monsters are killed by these machine guns, and that's cool, but seriously, there needed to be more weapon variety. I wanna see monsters getting killed by a whole plethora of different weapons.
One thing they changed from the game is this: The monsters aren't from Hell like in the game, instead, they're caused by this virus thing, which is cool, because they still get shot up, but having the monsters come from hell would have a bit cooler. But it's forgiven.
The movie follows the game's main storyline pretty well, and, get this, it even has a bad-ass first-person perspective scene, where the main character, John Grimm, grabs a gun, and shoots every damn thing in sight, all in first person perspective, just like in the game. I thought that the first person thing would be throughout the movie, but it's only in the end, and when it happens, you feel like you're watching the first game just with really good graphics. Believe it, b****es, believe it.
In one scene, one of the soldiers is going head to head with one of the huge monsters in a holding cell that has electrified walls. He has no guns, so get this, he kicks the s*** out of the monster with his bare hands and a computer monitor with a thick wire sticking out the back. He swings this monitor by the wire and slams it against that damn monster. Of course, it doesn't hurt it, but this fight is so ridiculously bad-ass you'll wonder if you just died in the theater and are just watching a movie in heaven. I don't wanna spoil the end of this fight, it's so kick-ass I'd be DOOMED if I spoiled it...you get it?
One last thing: There's even a damn chainsaw in the movie. A CHAINSAW! That's all I have to say about that.
The only few beefs I had with this movie were this: Not enough action. Even though there's a lot, they could have cut down on the talking and amped up the action. Second, even though I complain about this in every single movie, this movie seriously needed some Gwar tunes. Honestly, when you're shooting the s*** out of ugly demon monsters, the only tunes that come to mind are, you guessed it, Gwar tunes. This movie seriously needed some. If it did, I swear to almighty God, I would have s*** my pants right there in the theater.
Score: 9 ½ out of 10.
If the ending were a hamburger....bruh, it'd be the best, most intense damn hamburger imaginable.....
About a year ago, I gave a my two cents on Saw when it first came out. Back then, I was being to critical towards it, and really stuck up about it. After watching it over about four times, I finally enjoyed it, and realized that there was some bad-assness in this movie. Now, I bring to you a better review, a bad-ass review, a review so good that my previous review is in this review's morning craps!!
Like I said, back then I didn't like this movie because I was looking too hard. I was expecting a deep movie with sharp plausibility. Then, as I watched this over, I realized, why the hell does this movie need it anyways? It's got a good story, a bad-ass ending, and lots of grungy violence. What more could you ask for, WHAT MORE?!
The story is this: Two men, Adam and Lawrence, wake up in a dirty, broken down bathroom, chained to the walls. In the middle of the room is a dead guy. In the dead guys hands are a tape recorder and a gun. The stench in the air ..is misery, bruh. Lawrence is told that if he doesn't get out before 6 in the morning, his family will be killed. Adam doesn't have much to lose, except most likely his life. They don't really do much in the time they're given. They find a bunch of clues, they're called on a cell phone and threatened, and also, they're given a hacksaw. The only way to get out is to cut through their feet. Now, if I'm wrong, which I'm not, is that a good story or is that a good story? It turns out, a crazy bastard named Jigsaw is behind this. He kidnaps people, puts them in dangerous situations, and finds ways for them to kill themselves.
The acting isn't what you would call that great, but there's a legitimate reason: The actors didn't really have any rehearsals because the budget was so low, so it's forgiven. But, as the movie goes on, the acting gets better, especially in the parts that need good acting.
Now, Saw doesn't really have any scary moments, even though it should. But I figure, if the movie's entertaining, who cares? There's nothing really scary in this movie, but does that mean it isn't intense? No, it doesn't. There's only a few intense scenes in the movie: One involving a dude in his underwear tying to get out of a barbed wire maze thing, and the ending. My God, the ending. The ending is kind of like a slap in the face to the audience, but who cares? You absolutely do not expect to see what you're gonna see. When you see what you see at the very end, you're seriously wondering, "What the F, bruh?! How's that happening?!" The ending is so damn intense, you'll wonder how on Earth you can take it.
Even though there's some stupid dialogue and setups, the movie still does what it wants to: It entertains. It's not scary, but it has some intense moments, and it's grungier than something that's really grungy. Obviously, these people had fun making it, and it was an overall cool movie. Don't look for something deep when you watch it, either.
This is a cool movie. Hopefully, part 2 will be just as cool. Also, some Gwar tunes would have been good, but unnecessary, so don't hate it for not having any.
Score: 8 out of 10.