Reviews written by registered user
WakenPayne

Page 1 of 138:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [Next]
1373 reviews in total 
Index | Alphabetical | Chronological | Useful

1 out of 7 people found the following review useful:
For the first time this Star Trek reboot feels like Star Trek!, 14 March 2017
7/10

I'm not going to lie when I watched the reboot I feel as though JJ Abrams had very little understanding of what drew me into the series and what it was all about. With the sequel rehashing plot lines from Star Trek 2 and even having a character who's goal of trying to instigate a war between humans and Klingons which was from Star Trek 6 (if I said I was a casual watcher would you guys believe me?)... It just felt like he was trying to pander to the fans by giving them stuff that they liked in previous films but fell short of said previous films... This however is actually pretty good.

The plot is that Kirk is doing a routine check around Space when a swarm of ships knocks the Enterprise down onto an uncharted planet. Everyone is stranded on wildly different parts of the planet due to their escape pods and must re-unite and stop the tyrannical alien who instigated this fight before he moves in to wipe out the Federation.

Okay, what's to like here? The actors - each and every single one of them pull through a great performance and even introduce a new dynamic as young Spock has to deal with the fact that the time-traveled version of himself from the future just died. I also enjoyed the villain actually being a former Federation Captain. But I would say if there is anything to compliment the most it's both the introduction of the character of Jaylah and Sofia Boutella's performance as her. She's a very interesting character that had to survive the planet under that rule with nobody and managed to get an old timey Federation Starship working again. She even offers technology to help the Enterprise crew escape.

In short while this movie has problems I can say for me whatever problem it may have had was substituted by something in it I enjoyed. The trailer of this did seem to be very misleading. Mainly because I thought it would be a case of questioning whether or not the team behind it even watched the shows or movies. I'll also say finally it also does feel like it's own thing as well. I will look forward to future movies in this series if it continues to go in this direction.

What could have been an easy way to cut the budget is worked to it's best advantage here, 14 March 2017
7/10

I know amongst the nerd community that there are a lot of fantasy and sci-fi movies in the 80's that must take the premise to modern-day to save on it's budget and most of them were pretty bad. I haven't seen these movies myself but from what little I've seen of some, I really don't want to. This however is how to do this premise right because what could have been a standard time travel episode of the original show (with a larger budget) ends up being a very good sci-fi comedy with a lot of memorable moments.

So the plot is that an alien probe starts sending a message that screws with space and Earth. on Vulcan continuing from 3 the crew decide to analyse the message and find that the only creatures that can hear it are humpback whales but they all died in a non-specific time frame between this movie and their time. They decide to time travel to find some so that message can get a reply. They try their best to accommodate to their new time and usually hijinx ensues but... unlike others of the time the comedy of trying to keep a low profile while Spock is mind-melding with a humpback whale in Sea World is actually funny.

I'll say the effects are quite good for their time and the actors do pull through something... worth seeing (I say worth seeing because Shatner has never been a good actor other than when he plays egotists or just parodies of himself) but the main draw here is the comedy. I will always laugh at the bit where Spock nerve pinches a punk to get him to turn off his stereo while a bus cheers. If there is anything to say against it I would say while there is a villain they're probably the most uninteresting villains in Star Trek history (it's just the American authorities in 1986) and that... It's not that I dislike what was done here it's just that when I watch Star Trek I do prefer it when it's actual space exploration, new worlds and aliens (unless it's Insurrection!). I'd say this is also the most accessible of Star Trek movies (either this, Wrath Of Khan or First Contact). so I would recommend this.

0 out of 1 people found the following review useful:
Actually... This is really good, 26 January 2017
8/10

When I started watching this movie I had... indifferent expectations, I knew of the iconic scenes but honestly not much else. After watching it I realized while it takes massive liberties with how the silent era of film worked... It is best described as a love letter to the films of the past as told through the eyes of the films of it's day and it's because of that and how movies have changed over the past 60 years that trying the same thing today would be next to impossible on this degree.

The plot is that it's the late silent era, Don Lockwood and Lina Lamont are a big romantic duo (Don seemingly reminding me of Douglas Fairbanks, I might be wrong but that's the vibe I got) and they play it up for publicity despite Don hating Lamont behind the scenes. In an interview he describes how dignified and easy his rise to fame was while we're shown it was hard and he had to take anything he can find to break through the glass ceiling. While on the run from fans he finds the one woman who hates the silent era of film and resists his charm.

Soon a new invention is added and a complete game changer for the very culture of cinema going and changes how movies would be shot forever. Sound. Thinking it's a gimmick the studio with Lockwood and Lamont continue to make their movie, until The Jazz Singer became a big hit, then it was turned into a sound movie, despite Lina Lamont not having the best voice for a sound movie. Initial test screenings are hated when a lot of technical troubles with the movie causes laughter in the audience. Fearing they'll be relics of their time unable to make the transition to talkies They decide to do 2 things, one is to reshoot scenes turning it into a musical and the other would be to dub Lina Lamont (which is actually funny if you read the trivia that the actress who played Lamont was the one singing the supposedly dubbed songs).

Aware she'll be dubbed Lamont decides to seize control of the studio and ensure that people think it's her voice and Kathy will go uncredited for her work. After the premiere they pretty much ensure that Lamont's career will be ruined by revealing the truth.

Okay the songs, the dances that choreography, The cinematography, the acting (for what it is) is all pretty good and the jokes even sometimes get a laugh out of me. But as I may have said it's biggest achievement was taking this love letter to the silent movie and telling it through what was the new ways Hollywood told stories, kind of encompassing all at the time.

The entire third act of the movie just kind of threw me off. Pretty much any actor having more power than a studio head at the time just threw my suspension of disbelief right out the window considering how actors were treated back then and even around the time this movie came out. It's just an obvious ploy that we don't feel bad that Lina Lamont would fade into obscurity and laughed out the theater. While the rest I would call a romanticized depiction of the silent era that just threw me off and never quite got back on track for me.

Either way I would recommend this simply for it's accomplishments. They really pay off and I know how clichéd and rose tinted someone seems when they say something like what I'm about to say but to make a love letter to encompass film as a whole to this extent I seriously don't think can happen today. If you want an extremely well done love letter to film I'd suggest checking this out.

Don's Plum (2001)
Doesn't deserve the flak it gets!, 22 January 2017
6/10

In spite of everything that has been said about this movie Don's Plum is not terrible. It is probably one of the most notorious unreleased movies ever made simply because of Leo and Tobey Maguire trying to block it and to be quite honest, I have no idea why and this is after watching it from start to finish in it's entirety.

The plot, many friends try to get dates where they go to this hangout place at a diner, they talk about sex, drugs and all other kinds of stuff. There really isn't all that much else to say about the plot mainly because this movie is minimalist, the only other thing of note is that it sometimes cuts to a character's internal thoughts which is them talking in a bathroom mirror with scratchy audio.

Okay, I'll say all the things I found wrong with this movie. Some stuff is really speratic and right the hell out of nowhere. One of the character's close to final notes is an internal thought described above where she was molested as a kid... That's not the kind of stuff to just bring up and throw away. It also makes out in the opening that Amber Benson is the lead when she's not. After trashing a car a half hour in we never see her again. Tobey Maguire has some really awkward line deliveries (although, why he sees this as more embarrassing than the dancing in Spiderman 3?... I have no clue) And at the end I feel as though in spite of the character insight nothing really was accomplished, like this is how these kids spend every Saturday night. That could work if it was a short movie but it's not.

Okay now to address the elephant in the room. There are many stories to suggest why this movie was never released and to be quite honest I can debunk so many of them. It was claimed Leo had a nude scene and claimed he was bisexual in this movie. Is Scott Bloom really the spitting image of Leo that you can't tell the difference? It was also claimed that it would ruin Maguire and Leo's image at the time, well today Leo has an Oscar and played FAR more unpleasant characters than some misogynistic prick that spends the entire movie putting people down (so I wouldn't think if released today it would harm his image) and with Maguire, he's usually a peacekeeper in those situations, as I may have said he's a little awkward - sure but I think that's deliberate. So I honestly don't know why they don't release it now because problems aside it can be pretty interesting to watch even without the crap in this paragraph.

Okay, the good things. Well the acting from all involved is pretty good and while I know it was mostly improvised I feel as though it did come across pretty damn good. I get the story is trying to be this deconstruction of the characters and their relationships with one another and while as I said that was rushed that idea is pretty intriguing. While it's also in black and white the cinematography at times can be really good.

So if you want me to be honest, had this been released properly I probably wouldn't have watched it but I'm glad I did mainly because of the stuff I've said above. To be quite honest if you're looking for reasons why this is the most personally despised film of Leo and Maguire's respective careers I personally think it's a head-scratcher. It's just a minimalist drama that seemed to be doing what Clerks did but instead got a lot of flak from either the media's coverage of the lawsuit or word of mouth from those events. If you can find a copy, if ANYTHING of what I've described above is your thing, while the characters aren't really likable I'd suggest watching it.

Could be the absolute perfect way to end this show!, 14 January 2017
10/10

Okay with Alex Mack there have been ups and downs and somewhere around the middle. I really don't know how I discovered the show but it's charm and humour caught my eye while watching the first season and after watching that end I wanted to see more (no thanks to the people making the DVD's wanting to cash in on Jessica Alba's popularity when she was only in 3 episodes out of 13 in the first season!) so I found a way to get them on DVD and I have just finished watching. This 2 parter actually seems to be so good I can't understate enough that I think that it's almost criminal that you can barely watch the show (I'm not kidding either when I say there are episodes on IMDb that just made me ask "What are they talking about?") and that... I would like to see a sequel series after this.

Okay the plot, after accidentally revealing her powers to Louis Driscol, Alex explains it and soon the Chemical plant is onto her right before shady dealings to get government approval means that GC-161 will be on the shelves by the next morning. Unfortunately Danielle Atron is taking measures to kidnap Alex and her family (in a clever directing choice of it being the one time Danielle and Alex seem to be on-screen together). While all hell is breaking loose Dave takes measures to the police to ensure that Danielle is arrested and thwarted before she runs out of the country with a billion dollars in her pocket. Hunter (a character I would have had no problem with if they actually developed him) and Ray are doing all they can to rescue Alex and her family and Louis trying to make things right is trying to tell everyone about Alex's powers and Danielle's shady behaviour.

This could be the best episode of the show by far! Every character they could possibly get comes back (except Vince, I thought he was a funny comic foil and I would have loved to have seen a proper finale to him) and their finale is exactly what you want, they even got Meredith Bishop back for one final scene (despite being a main actor hasn't been only credited since around the beginning of the season). The mood is high octane and the kind of stuff that has you glued to your seat if you had any investment in the characters, it reminds me of stuff like Buffy but for a younger demographic and sci-fi. It even has humour thrown in.

What's wrong with this then? Well as usual for the show the CGI is awful (I know it's late-90's Nickelodeon and excuseable but... still), there's a scene wherein Ray is handcuffed to a desk with a bomb on it and when he calls for help I felt as though that could have gone for another take. That and the usual rant on how there's no proper DVD release for the show, I think given the chance this show could be seen as a really good time capsule of entertainment in the 90's. But apparently there's no such thing as a nostalgia market as far as Nickelodeon's concerned. Either way, if you only have the first season on DVD I will encourage you to try and find all of it because while there is bad stuff there is a lot of good that it seems they're trying to have it fade away when it deserves a lot more than that!

0 out of 3 people found the following review useful:
Fairly good for a 90 minute episode, 20 December 2016
8/10

I really enjoyed Cowboy Bebop the series however while I was watching it I honestly could not find a copy of the movie until after i watched the show. However, this is probably so akin to the show in terms of being exactly like a good filler episode of the series that I honestly have a hard time differentiating between the two which is actually the best compliment I can give an adaptation of a show when the show happens to be really freaking good. The story involves the crew of the Bebop going after a case that soon escalates into a terrorist bombing and then them trying to stop it. While I did say it is extremely similar to the show one of the things that might come out of that is that the show's singular plot lines go only slightly above 20 minutes (I'm not counting the rivalry between Spike and Vicious which is the edge the show has for being better in my eyes) However here, the situation is high scale enough to be translated and in all honesty the villain of the movie is actually a pretty fascinating character. That really is where the movie and the show both shine though, in their characters. I'd say this is essential watching for fans of the show and if not, while this isn't a perfect jumping on point it's still pretty good.

0 out of 4 people found the following review useful:
Breaks the "Odd numbered Star Trek movies are bad" idea, 20 December 2016
7/10

This movie seems to get swept under the rug when it comes to Star Trek and honestly when it's between the one Die-Hard fans usually consider to be the best in the series and the one that was for a good long while the most financially successful movie in the series it's not hard to see why. But while this isn't as good as Star Trek 2 or 4 this is actually good in it's own right.

This takes place after 2. They return home to find Bones thinking he's Spock and Genesis quarantined. when a Starship is searching Genesis they find a young version of Spock alive regenerated by the planet because as he was sent there as new life was forming on Genesis that regenerated him. While this is going on a renegade Klingon vessel also catches wind of Genesis and what it does and decides to take it and claim the "weapon" for themselves. Soon Kirk is visited by Spock's father who says that part of Spock survived and would have used a form of mind-melding to transfer his knowledge and personality over to Kirk but they find out it was actually Bones and wants to be taken to Genesis. They soon go on this adventure once again.

Okay while as usually Shatner's acting is... Shatner the rest of the cast do a pretty good job. While Christopher Lloyd isn't as memorable of a villain as Khan there is a lot to his performance that quite honestly really does make his character interesting. The way this builds story on 2 by Genesis being unstable and even Spock's resurrection by the planet with no memories is actually really fascinating to me. I also quite enjoy the special effects and the action as well and the story is actually pretty good.

So this movie is just a consistent level of okay. It does get above average at times and I think it's actually a pretty underrated movie in this series. Again considering what came before and afterwards in the series I can understand it. I really would recommend this if you're a casual viewer of the Star Trek series.

2 out of 2 people found the following review useful:
Quite possibly the worst Star Trek movie I've seen, 20 December 2016
2/10

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

When it comes to my viewing experiences with Star Trek I've seen 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7 and 8. I'd also put the reboot films in there as well (the first 2, haven't seen the new one) but honestly... they don't count in my eyes. The end result of this movie is a bore possibly moreso than the first one because at least the first one had a lot of very interesting ideas in it's second half. Also the script in this is so bad virtually everyone is unlikeable.

The plot is that Data has gone haywire while observing a planet full of people who don't believe in technology (I do mean people in the sense that they didn't do a make-up job on the actors to make them look like... you know, aliens) and exposes a Federation base that could have easily been built in space. Meanwhile Picard accepts a new race into The Federation and gets informed about Data and he decides to try and stop him... by singing the HMS Pinafore... I know the reasoning behind it but how is anyone supposed to look at that scene and not think "What the hell?".

After that surprisingly works evidently they find out that Data's morality took over (Yes, because morality can be totally programmable facts in the future!) and they find a huge machine to take the population of 600 (remember this) on a Holo-deck replica of their village. It also turns out that the reason the Federation wants them off without consulting them (oh it gets better) is that the planet can actually stop ageing and work medical miracles (should I remind that they hate technology and the people who use it?). Oh and as a reminder these people are not the inhabitants of the planet and there are these other group of aliens who want the planets properties because they're dying (oh and it also says it's the needs of 600 people vs the needs of billions!) and spoilers but they are the same race as the technology haters but exiled off the planet because they dared offered a different viewpoint... Oh but the technology hating people are the GOOD GUYS.

I really don't see why this movie needed to exist. The technology hating aliens are actually constantly saved by it and this tries to push the whole "re-connect with nature" and how warp capability is bad because "where could it take us except away from here" Yes because Space exploration in the Star Trek universe is pretty boring I guess. Oh and the Federation really doesn't help with forcing them off without realizing it happened. Virtually there is so much against each side in this movie that I really wonder how the first Star Trek movie is considered to be worse than it. It at least when seeing something that needed explanation, they at least explained it rather than this movie's (and I swear I'm not kidding) "No more questions".

So aside from a REALLY bad script whose reaction from me was "between this and The Phantom Menace no wonder the genre of Space Opera died for a while in summer blockbusters!" What else do I have to say about this? For a Star Trek movie this has no interesting ideas. The rest left me with something but no, this left me with nothing but the thought of the cast and the cinematography being wasted when the idea of F Murray Abraham playing a Star Trek villain who could have been a tragic villain alongside Patrick Stewart's Jean-Luc Picard really screams more awesome as an idea. If they just revamped the entire idea of the Baku and threw in something interesting to walk away with after the movie's over then I'm not sure if it would be good but it would have been a lot better than this!

5 out of 10 people found the following review useful:
If you want to see actually funny nerds go on the internet!, 5 December 2016
1/10

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Okay, I think I might dislike the modern American sitcom half as much as reality Television. I'm sure that if I go digging I can find something worth looking at, I fully admit that but then I see this stuff go on for over 10 years. Basically this is the image of nerds by non-nerds. Any stereotype that you can throw at nerds can be somewhere in this show. The whole thing feels very half assed, they reference a scene in Game Of Thrones wherein a character gets his son's genitals in a box (and if you're grossed out by that I understand but wait, I haven't said the punchline) after that out-of-nowhere dialogue the response is along the lines of "It's always good to have spares"... WHAT?! This is funny? humour at it's best is when something unexpected happens, stuff like the ending to the movie Some Like it Hot, the drag comedy. It ends with the line exchange "I'm a MAN!" "Well, nobody's perfect"... Brilliantly done and something I'm sure most audiences can laugh at. So aside from the writing that hopes it's audiences can't comprehend humour and the characters that only exist in someone's mind what else is wrong with this? The celebrities they get in. I mean it seems like they got James Earl Jones, Will Wheaton, Summer Glau just to name a few just to say "Wait, WE CAN WRITE NERDS! LOOK HERE ARE NERD ICONS!" How about they quote bad movies or something? I think even throwing in the cast impersonating Tommy Wiseau would get a laugh even if the audience never saw The Room. Oh I'm sorry, this operates that nerds only like sci-fi and fantasy shows, movies and comic books... Just look up any nerd/comedian on the internet, if you want your laugh just watch that. I certainly find it preferable to this!

5 out of 17 people found the following review useful:
You know, I thought this show died off a LONG time ago, 5 December 2016
1/10

When it comes to television... there is a lot better out there than this. I will also be fair I only watched disc 1 of Season 1 but I do feel that is enough to do a review. Basically this is a family sitcom/mocumentary so it's basically the stuff that The Honeymooners, The Brady Bunch and so many others have replicated beforehand that The Simpsons seemed to dominate after it hit it's stride (and even now after that... 6th dead horse is beaten). Usually I see some kind of effort with the shows that came beforehand... I'll analyze the three separate family situations. There's the rich old man and the annoying as hell gold digger and her son that seems to be beyond his years in maturity... This is not funny. There's the gay couple that would have flown if this was the 90's and their adopted kid... This is also not funny. Then there's the main family to cover all the demographics like any other family sitcom would do... This also, sing it with me - IS NOT FUNNY! I never once got a laugh out of any of the situations. Basically Ty Burrel is the crap version of Al Bundy combined with the "Ooh the dad that wants to relate to his kids is really dorky!" Seriously, this would have been okay if it was the 90's (well, it wouldn't because this isn't funny and I actually have laughed at some sitcoms from back then but I digress)... Okay, this will be the last tine I criticize the humour by saying how much I didn't laugh at a single thing for a number of episodes that I don't care to remember. But the whole 90's comparison still stands, this just feels like autopilot. The character of Gloria in particular is one of the most annoying characters I've ever seen. All in all my simple question is how does THIS go on for 8 years while I've seen better stuff not last a season?


Page 1 of 138:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [Next]