Reviews written by registered user

Page 1 of 14:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [Next]
137 reviews in total 
Index | Alphabetical | Chronological | Useful

Evil Dead (2013)
2 out of 13 people found the following review useful:
Exactly what American Horror needed!, 16 April 2013

It's gory, it's bloody, and it's fun, whats not to like, this is Evil Dead after all people, not Strawberry shortcake. All you naysayers are just expecting another watered down horror movie and where slapped in the face by the awesomeness of this new one. This movie was excellent, well shot, well edited, acted..and had tons and tons of gore and blood, exactly whats been missing from modern horror.

All you boneheads complaining that its "too violent and gory" are telling people exactly what they need to know, that this movie isn't boring, or shy to be a horror film.

This is a real horror film, the one that gave American Horror films it's guts back! This film is just what American horror films needed!

2 out of 7 people found the following review useful:
Great Fun! One of Burton's Good Ones, 18 May 2012

I've never seen the show, or the previous films, but Tim Burton's Dark Shadows was great fun. The comedy is not in your face, it's subtle and sarcastic and witty. The film is a slowburner, it's not action packed, but I don't think it was meant to be either. This after all is paying homage to all those spooky Dan Curtis movies and television shows, he was always about the old fashioned horror clichés, the fog, the moon, the ghosts, the giant mansion.

I thought Depp was great as Barnabas and is really what kept me glued to the film, Barnabas is a great character, the fish out of water elements were great, but so was the theme about trying to bring the Collins family back to it's former glory.

I salute Burton for not using so much CGI, this time, its only used when necessary. This time we get real sets, and not everything is computer generated. The art direction is top notch as is expected of a Burton film.

Some people might not like it when compared to the TV show, because this is a comedy and the shows were not comedic, but I think on its own merits, the film works and I consider it to be one of Burton's "good ones"

3 out of 9 people found the following review useful:
Wow, what an incredible bore., 28 November 2007

I went into this movie with no expectations whatsoever, I didn't know what it was about, I didn't know any plot details or anything. But it seemed like it might be good cause Lucy Liu was in it and it was produced by Sam Raimis Ghost house pictures.

And I see there desire to do something different with the tired vampire genre. Unfortunately the movie fails horribly. This movies main drawback, its main flaw is that its an incredible bore. Scenes that are meant to be "suspenseful" are simply long drawn out scenes of people going into rooms looking scared. Nothing to make the scenes special. Its just scene after scene of long boring minutes of people walking into rooms. If felt as though they put these scenes in to stretch the movies running time which is far too long for a simple vampire movie.

What this movie was really trying to do was use a style of storytelling thats been made popular by directors like Alejandro Gonzalez Iñarritu in films like 21 Grams, Babel and Amores Perros. Basically, the whole movie is out of order, scenes have no sort of cohesion, you see the movie, the scenes are in the same order as if someone had thrown them in the air and edited them in the way the fell on the floor. This style of non linear story telling can work when done right. When done wrong (as it was in this movie) it can be disastrous. Itll take a while before you can finally make sense of whats going on, and even then, good luck.

This movie was a mess, Im not sure why Lucy Liu would agree to participate on this crap fest of a film, it was above all things boring and confusing. It has a few good moments here and there, but then it reverts to its pointless conversations where no one says whats really going on. Its really stupid, but people kept talking and babbling and going around things without getting to the point. Its that type of movie thats ashamed of being in the horror genre, its afraid to use the term vampire or bloodsucker, even though thats exactly what this movie is about.

Anyhows, I do not recommend this movie, you are going to keep waiting for it to get good, and its NEVER going to happen. Its that type of film that you keep giving it a chance to see if it will go somewhere, but it just never never takes off. You wanna feel like you wasted two hours of your life? Be my guest, but this was just awful.

Rating: 1 out of 5

9 out of 13 people found the following review useful:
It should have been called The Virgin Mary Sightings.., 2 October 2006

Title: Santeria: The Soul Possessed Director: Benny Mathews Cast: Nito Perez Jr., Kevin Rankin, Maria Fonseca Sotolongo, Rico Thuewalker Review: Santeria has always been one of those religions where everybody gets spooked whenever it gets mentioned. Images of human/animal sacrifices and blood rituals pop to mind whenever Santeria is referenced and it's always been a religion that people find spooky, scary, frightening and just plain strange. It's a secretive religion that doesn't like for their beliefs and their practices to be well known. And every once in a while a movie will come along to try and explore the whole thing and exploit the supernatural aspects of Santeria, cant really say I blame them since said religion deals so heavily with the supernatural, bloody animal sacrifices and rituals. This is one of those movies trying to take full advantage of Santeria's notoriety, but failing miserably.

The story is supposedly based on a real life case of a boy named Ricky. Ricky receives a message from what he thinks is the Virgin Mary. The whole barrio in which he lives in being composed mostly of Mexican folk buy into the whole vision deal and make a big deal out of Rickys supposed connection with the Virgin Mary. In comes a priest who's interested in exploring the whole thing for his television show (The Brother Neil Show!). He, along with a few other members of Ricky's family plus a photographer get together and try and decipher what's really going on. Is Ricky being visited by the Virgin Mary or is it some other evil spirit fooling him and trying to take advantage of him? Well, if you let yourself be fooled by the cover of this movie, you'd swear this could possibly end up being a kick ass horror movie. Something that will chill you to the bone. But it really isn't. It does have interesting subject matter to deal with, what with Santeria and all its rituals, this could have made a really good horror movie. But it didn't. Mainly because it fails to conjure up a dreadful atmosphere. Its low budget didn't help it any, since the film looks like it was shot on a video camera. The director does as good a job as he can with what little money he had (was that a glimpse of promise in the direction?) but a movie dealing with the supernatural in my opinion should have a decent budget for special effects or else you just end up with a bunch of cheesy home made computer effects that completely take you out of the movie. And that's what happened with this film. The cheesy computer effects are quite literally laughable and just don't help the movie, specially a movie that's based on true events. You don't even need visual effects to create a scary atmosphere, but this film decided to use them anyways even if they didn't have a budget for them. Too bad.

The movie also fails to go really into Santeria as it only scratches upon the surface of this religion. In fact, it shouldn't even be called Santeria because its not really about the Santeria religion. Its more about the phenomenon of Virgin Mary sightings and how a kid who thinks it's the Virgin Mary really ends being harassed by an evil vengeful ghost. The only element that really has to do with Santeria is Ricky's mother who does a couple of rituals to try and save him, but that's it. So don't be fooled into thinking that you are going to see a movie that really goes into the whole thing and you might learn a thing or two about Santeria…cause you wont. So to me at least it was a disappointment from that angle as well. If you want to see a good movie about the subject see The Believers with Martin Sheen. Now that's a good Santeria horror film that will scare you and even teach you a thing or two about it.

So all in all, this movie was an extremely bad low budget effort that fails to deliver what it promises with its title and its poster. Its got a lot of bad acting, a lot of horrible cgi effects and its just a bad production. I watched it only to see if it would get at least a little better but it didn't. It only got worse and worse until I finally I was given no choice but to exorcise the DVD from my DVD player. The power of Christ compels you NOT to watch this pseudo horror flick! You've been warned.

Rating: 1 out of 5

1 out of 8 people found the following review useful:
Fun low budget twisted horror, 12 September 2006

Horror director Dante Tomaselli is keeping the old school horror movie alive. You know, the kind of horror film that actually takes itself seriously in trying to scare the crap out of you. The kind of horror film that doesn't rely some much on computer effects or silly boo scares. The kind of horror film that concentrates more on creating a brooding threatening atmosphere instead of trying to make the next witty pop culture reference. Yes sir, the old school horror is alive and kicking in the hands of Dante Tomaselli.

The story is about the Bruno family. A pretty normal family going out for a vacation in the middle of the Pine Barren Woods in New Jersey. They think its going to be a fun filled weekend with the family in a cozy little cabin, but when they get a flat tire in the middle of the woods things take a turn to the wild and crazy side. They encounter the Leeds family. A family of demented drug addicted freaks of nature who are interested in killing, maiming and making the life of the Brunos a living hell. Literally!

Satans Playground starts out like a straight forward horror film with the family getting lost in the woods and all that and we get to meet yet another crazy demented family living out in the middle of nowhere. But thats when the normal, straight forward horror movie premise ends. After that it turns into a Dante Tomaselli movie and I loved that! To be quite honest, what I love about Tomasellis films is the dreamlike feel that they have. Even though Tomaselli aims for what others would consider a normal horror movie with Satans Playground, he still descends into his trademark hallucinogenic nightmarish world. So be ready for a movie that mixes it up. We get equal parts straight forward horror, and equal parts Tomaselli going crazy with his interesting dream logic and nightmarish images. He does a good job once again in bringing his nightmares to life.

The performances were great all along. I loved seeing Felissa Rose disintegrate; she did a fantastic job of reacting to all the craziness going on around her. She dominates most of the movie with her solid performance and is quite obviously the lead in the film. Ellen Sandweiss who horror fans (myself included) know and love from Evil Dead gets a chance to once again run crazy through the woods as she did in her previous encounters with evil spirits in Sam Raimis horror classic . She also turns in an interesting performance as she goes insane looking for her lost baby.

The most interesting performance in the film comes from the most unexpected of places: Irma St. Paul. She plays the leader of the crazy family and does a memorable take on the crazy mother role. She snorts coke, she hammers people with sledge hammers and she lies to the cops like a pro. I really enjoyed her character and would love to see her in another horror movie soon. Christie Sanford plays a deaf and mute women and Sanford effectively channels evil almost as perfectly as she did in Tomasellis first film Desecration in which she played Sister Madeline, the evil demonic nun. She has that evil cackle of a laugh and that demented look thats sure to spook anyone. Here she plays a child like killer who wears pony tails and walks around in her Pijamas bludgeoning people with a sledgehammer.

Speaking of sledgehammers, I was a bit disappointed by the absence of gore in this film. Though Tomaselli has never been an extremely gory director ala Lucio Fulci, (Tomaselli tends to focus more on the horrors of the mind) I was expecting a bit more gruesomeness to take place on screen. As it is, there are killings and mayhem, but most of the time they happen off screen or are suggested. Except of course for that one gloriously gory scene that makes up for it. Wow when that scene came on I was cheering!

As much as I like Tomasellis films I must admit that this movie had a glitch or two. There's a couple of things that I just could not pass up. I know that cops are often times portrayed in films as being completely incompetent, but in this movie they really take the taco. The way the cops act in this film seemed completely unrealistic to me. Or maybe the cop on this film was just a real idiot or something.

Watching this movie with Dante Tomasellis audio commentary on will not only help you understand many of the films unexplained plot points (like the Leeds family true nature) and apparent logic gaps but its also a glimpse into a horror directors mind. This audio commentary is the way a real audio commentary should be like. Very scene specific! Rarely does Tomaselli diverge into talking about things we don't care about. He is really into his films, really into his world and what he is trying to convey through his films. So I highly recommend that after you watch the film, you watch it again but with the directors audio commentary.

So in conclusion, this movie isn't perfect, its got a few glitches here and there. But it is a highly entertaining film with good performances. Plus its just fun, in Tomasellis own style. It has that old school charm of a 70s horror film. Its like taking The Evil Dead, The Texas Chainsaw Massacre, Halloween and The Shinning and adding that twisted Tomaselli touch. No unrealistic CGI, no WB teenage stars. Satans Playground is low tech, old school horror, and it shows that a lot can be done with very little money. With a budget of roughly 500,000 I think that Tomaselli achieved a heck of a lot. I cant wait to see what he will do next!

Super Fly (1972)
5 out of 8 people found the following review useful:
Gritty, dark, dirty and good., 14 August 2006

Ill be darned if this film wasn't the mother of all Blaxploitation films.

The story is about this drug dealer called Priest Youngblood. He has a good business built for himself by selling cocaine out on the streets of New York city. He and his buddy Eddie have made a small fortune with their dealing and now Priest is ready to bow down and get out of the drug dealing business, but not before doing one last deal. Buy a bunch of coke cheap and make a bunch of money fast. Will his buddy Eddie be okay with that, will the hustler lifestyle let Priest Youngblood go free? And a better question would be, does he really want to leave that lifestyle behind?

I was expecting a crappy blaxploitation flick for some reason. A bore fest with nothing that would surprise me. Boy was I wrong! This film is exceptionally well written. The dialog rings so true in many scenes that I had no choice but to sing praises for this movie as I was watching it. Phillip Fenty the writer, focused on giving these characters dialog that would sound like real people talking real jive from the streets. I mean when you hear these guys doing a deal, it most certainly sounds like the way it could have really gone down in the streets of New York in the 70s. So be ready for some groovy dialog, thats not only genuine to the era, but also adds a level of reality to the proceedings. Of special notice is a dialog that goes on between Eddie and Priest, in this sequence Eddie tries to convince Priest to stay in the business and make more millions, to live the American dream of having eight track players and TV's in every room. It was just amazing. There's more little speeches like that one spread through out the movie that are really quite excellent.

Visually speaking the movie looks gritty. I mean, grind house cinema was invented by movies such as this one. The streets look like real streets and by that I mean, dark, dirty and rat infested. Its not like todays over stylized films that look slick and pretty yet take away the level of reality from films. Not Superfly though, its quite evident that this film was filmed in the real streets of New York back in the 70s when Queens and The Bronx looked like crap. There's no fancy lighting here or anything, this place looks dangerous, for real. And the film did an excellent job of capturing the feel and stink of New York back in those days. Right from the opening credits when we see Priest parading around the city in his pimped up pink Cadillac to visiting some real nightclubs in New York playing some funked out tunes! That sequence in the club where a real live funk/jazz band is playing totally transported me to that era. The movie just absorbs the 70s and basically just keeps it in this little time capsule perfectly preserved for your viewing enjoyment. And how could this director (Gordon Sparks Jr.) not make a movie as cool as this when his daddy (Gordon Sparks Senior.) was the one responsible for Shaft? There's no doubt that this movie is sleazy, its grind house AND blaxploitation all rolled up into one! The characters aren't nice and perfect, in fact they are the sleaziest, baddest mothers to walk the streets of New York. Even our main character Priest Youngblood spends most of the film stuffing his nostrils with cocaine every five minutes. And I mean this literally not figuratively. They are all drug dealers and coke heads, pimps and crooks, kinda reminded me a lot of Sin City. Only this isn't some CGI fictional city, this is N.Y. C! And yet, the cool thing about this film is that it is sleazy, and gritty yet it has a certain style in its direction that is very hard to ignore. There's this one scene in particular that really blew me away in which we see Priest and Eddie moving on up in the drug dealing business by a series of photo montages that were really amazing. And after I saw this film I had no doubt in my mind where Blow got some of its ideas from.

Ron O Neal absolutely dominates this movie as Priest Youngblood. The badass drug dealing cool dude who everyone looks up to and fears. The guy moving up in the dealing world and you better look out and not mess with him. He is an anti-hero cause I have to admit about half way through the movie I couldn't believe that I was actually rooting for a freaking coke dealer who got high on his own supply! What I mean to say by all this is that this character is highly memorable and will have you rooting for him in no time flat, despite his despicable lifestyle.

But above all else, the film had a good story. The bad guy wanting to get out and live with his girl. But can he escape? Will he? Or was this all he was born to do? Rent this movie and find out. This is without a doubt THE best blaxploitation film I have ever seen and highly recommend it to those who enjoy gritty, dark and funky gangster films from the seventies.

Rating: 4 out of 5

14 out of 20 people found the following review useful:
Epic film, Kinsky's last, 14 August 2006

Director Werner Herzog and actor Klaus Kinsky did many films together. They were all spectacular because of Herzogs direction and they all had an intensely insane looking leading man because of Kinskys solid performances. Cobra Verde was their last collaboration together because three years after making this film Kinsky died. He left a great legacy as an actor and Cobra Verde is a prime example of that.

The story is about Francisco Manuel (aka the Bandit of Cobra Verde) a bandit who goes from town to town looking for a strange new world. Basically everyone fears him because he is untamable, like a wild beast. One day, he gets a job taking care of slaves in a Sugar Cane field and he gets to live in the same house as his boss, the owner of the fields. Cobra Verde being the bandit that he is has his way with not one, but all three of the bosses daughters and gets them pregnant. The boss, looking for a way to get back at Cobra Verde for what he did, sends him on a mission to Africa to buy more slaves. Of course the bosses real intentions are to get Cobra Verde killed in the journey. What they don't know is that Cobra Verde is not a person who easily gives up and hes a tough cookie to kill. And so begins Cobra Verdes journey into the hot, deadly and colorful depths of Africa.

This movie, like many of Herzogs films is a journey into the unknown. I love how Herzog does that in all his films. Transporting us to strange places that truly exist, but are so wondrous and amazing that they have a surreal dreamlike feel to them. On Fitzcarraldo and Aguirre we went deep into the Amazonian Jungle, but on Cobra Verde we get to see the heart and soul of Africa. Once the movie gets to Africa (on its second half) things get really interesting and you will find yourselves completely immersed in the African culture. From the injustices of slavery to the savagery of African tribes. It was all new, strange and different to me because Herzog really went in there and found incredible real life locations in which to shoot Cobra Verde. Its as if Herzog searches out these incredible places, dives deep into them, and then brings them back to us via his films for us to enjoy.

This movie is epic in scale and it shows in every single frame of film. We get hundreds of extras in many scenes. One particular scene stood out and its the one in which Kinsky trains hundreds of African women all dressed in their war attire and marching while singing their war songs. It was fantastic and epic and I loved every second of it. Not only that but its even more amazing when I learned that this huge looking film only cost two million dollars to make! I was unaware that a film of such grand scale could be made with so little money. Hollywood could learn a thing or two from Herzogs style of film-making.

Klaus Kinsky once again turns in an intense performance as the titular character. He certainly goes in a journey from being a bandit to becoming the king of an African tribe. I really got to like his character because he is a guy who literally does what he wants and has complete freedom over what to do with his life. Nobody tells this guy what to do, but once he sets his sites on achieving a goal (and its usually something pretty daunting) he goes all the way to make it happen.

Even when he accepts the responsibilities and challenges involved in going to Africa and taking slaves back to Brazil considering that slavery is almost completely abolished, he does it with a sure hand, ready to face whatever situations life might hurl at him. And Kinsky does all this with his own brand style, that crazy look the wild hair. In one particular scene in which he is training thousands of African women to go to war he goes completely ballistic trying to teach them how to properly handle a shield and a spear.

I've got a few complaints though, this movie has a few loopholes and unrealistic situations. I think a lot of it has to do with Herzog trying to evoke a feeling of otherworldliness and strangeness but in one particular scene Cobra Verde has to send a message from on place to another and he does it via thousands of people standing in line doing these secret signals with white flags and one person duplicates the message until it reaches the other person hundreds of miles away. This scene might lend itself for a beautiful and strange image, but its completely unrealistic! But I was willing to let it go for sake of artistic liberty. Another thing that grated me the wrong way was how one of the African kings spoke perfect English, as well as all his followers. The scene would have been a lot more believable with the king having a translator, but as it was filmed, its hard to believe that a king in the middle of Africa would speak English, and much less have all his thousands of followers understand him and cheer him. Again, a minor set back in a great film.

Like many of Herzogs films, the pace is sometimes slow, but when Herzog wants to amaze you he will. There will be moments of heavy dialog, and slow situations and then Whamo! Herzog will hit you in the head with something truly amazing. Trust me on this, this movie has many surprises up its sleeves! And you wont be disappointed if you enjoy movies that take you to strange new worlds.

Rating: 4 out of 5

13 out of 17 people found the following review useful:
Stylish gore, 14 August 2006

I recently acquired Italian horror director Michele Soavis Cemetery Man which was released recently for the first time on DVD. I had seen it before, but somehow now it became one of my favorite horror films. It has a style, beauty and grace that many horror films seem to miss nowadays. So naturally I set my eyes on seeing all of Michele Soavis horror films. I had already seen two of them The Church and Cemetery Man, and The Sect isn't out on DVD so I decided to see his only other movie on DVD which is Stagefright. This was Michele Soavis directorial debut, so I didn't really know what to expect. A flawed film made by an at the time rookie? A promising film with glimpses of greatness here and there?

The story is about this group of actors that are putting up a play. They have very little time to practice some of the dance moves and songs so they are all under a lot of pressure. A psycho killer finds his way to the theater and locks everybody inside with absolutely no way out. Then he begins to systematically kill all the actors on the play in some really gruesome ways.

Well its no secret that Soavi was Argentos pupil and I think that out of all of Soavis horror films that I have seen Stagefright is the one in which this is most evident. There's the killers point of view, some strange and interesting camera angles and even an animal themed killer. But thats not a bad thing in my book because eventually Soavi found his own voice and style as evidenced by his last horror film Cemetery Man. Still, Stagefright has a great style and look. What I love the most about Soavis films is that they deal with all these horrible killings, yet the film has a class and a finesse about it that kind of elevates the sleaziness of the slasher genre to a high that it rarely reaches.

Don't get me wrong here, this movie may be artsy and classy, but its still very very much a slasher film. There's some truly brutal deaths here! After the movie sets up its premise the ball gets rolling really fast! Thats one of the things I liked the most about this movie it had a fast pace and wasn't boring in the least! Once the killer puts on that cool as hell Owls Head mask on his noggin things get really gory and interesting. From people being cut in half with chainsaws (great scene man!) to some cool decapitations this movie had me cheering for more! So slasher fans and fiends, you wont be disappointed!

Another excellent thing about this movie was that it wasn't an incoherent mess. I've seen a lot of Lucio Fulci films, a lot of Dario Argento films and a few other Italian directors and they all suffer from the same illness. They cant seem to bring together a story and tell it in a coherent understandable fashion. Not so with Soavis Stagefright. I was surprised at how smoothly the story flowed and I was surprised that I was actually understanding it without any extreme effort. In a sense I would say that Soavi took everything that Argento and Fulci did wrong and did it right. He learned from their mistakes and therefore he is a better filmmaker for it. He is the next step in the evolutionary ladder as far as Italian Horror goes. This might also be why Soavi is heralded as the savior of Italian Horror by many a horror connoisseurs.

So in conclusion, Stagefright is a solidly well directed slasher. One that showed promise for what is one of horrordoms best directors,even though his body of work is comprised of only four movies. I hope Soavi wakes up from that dream soon and delivers us with something as good or better then what he has already done. Soavi you the man! Rating: 5 out of 5

35 out of 46 people found the following review useful:
Dracula Herzog style, 14 August 2006

It was only recently that I finally got to experience a Werner Herzog film. And I say experience because you don't just watch a Werner Herzog film, you experience it. Otherwordly images will appear on the screen whisking you away to strange unusual worlds. When I first saw Fitzcarraldo and Aguirre: The Wrath of God I was spellbound. I was astounded at how much Herzog could evoke while relying solely on the grandness of his visuals. So when I decided to finally see Werner Herzogs remake of F.W. Murnaus classic silent film Nosferatu, I knew I was in for something special. And I was. Simply put, this is one of the finest vampire movies ever made.

The story is one every horror fan is familiar with. Count Dracula is interested in purchasing a new home in England, so Jonathan Harker a real estate agent is sent to Draculas castle high in the Carpathian mountains to sign the legal documents that will seal the deal. Of course what Harker isn't ready for is the fact that Count Dracula is actually a vampire, a man who sold his soul to Satan and now walks the earth as an undead bloodsucker. Dracula falls for Harkers girl and tries to take her from him, you know the drill.

From the small synopsis I typed on that last paragraph you think, yeah, seen one Dracula you seen em all. Right? Wrong! Though this movie does have the same plot line that we have seen hundreds of times in different vampire films, this one certainly has something that makes it different. First and foremost, this film was directed by Werner Herzog and it isn't going to be your regular ordinary vampire movie. There's a certain visual splendor that goes with all of Herzogs films and its evidently present in this film.

What I admire most about Herzog is that he doesn't rely on special effects to make his movies visually interesting. The guy goes to a mountain deep in the middle of nowhere, he looks for the most beautiful and exotic location possible and then shoots his film there. He did it in Aguirre and Fitzcarraldo and he did it again here. Herzogs special effects depend on nature itself. When Jonathan Harker embarks on his journey towards Draculas castle you'll be swept away on a journey that takes you to misty mountains and forceful rivers. So be ready for a film that takes you to some of the most beautiful and exotic places on this earth.

This really isn't a full remake of Murnaus film because what this film really does is mix both Murnaus film and Bram Stokers novel. Instead of Count Orlock we get Dracula. So its sort of a mix of both sources.

Then of course we have the second strongest point in many of Herzogs films. Actor Klaus Kinsky. This guy completely devours the Dracula character and brings him to life in a way that no other actor has ever done. This Dracula isn't a sexy, well dressed lady killer. This guy is animalistic in nature, a creature hunting for his pray, a tortured soul yes, almost disgusted at who he is but at the same time accepting it fully. So much is conveyed through Kinskys performance, his eyes, his hands and pointy nails, and his whispering voice. A very creepy Dracula if you ask me.

A thing that makes this film standout as well is its realism. There's not a single special effect on this movie save for Klaus Kinskys Dracula make up. Everything else is as real as it gets. Draculas castle isn't a miniature or computer generated image, its a real castle. Its not even a set! Its a real freaking castle! When Dracula sucks blood he doesn't go into a bloodbath dripping blood all over the place, he sucks the blood with great care and precision not to spill a single drop. Almost like a baby sucking on his mothers breast. When the sun hits a vampire, its not a visual effects spectacle, the vampire just dies and falls in the floor when the sun hits him. When Dracula transforms into a bat, Herzog shows a real life bat in slow motion in all its natural beauty. Its like everything is done in the most realistic way possible. Nothing is an exaggeration. And when Draculas shadow moves along as if having a life of its own, its an effect done for real. On camera with lights and shadows. Kind of reminded me of Gary Shermans Poltergeist III in that sense.

A warning though, this movie is not fast paced. Its deliberately paced to be creepy and dreamlike. Herzog will stay focused on things for long periods of time so you can really transport yourself to the moment. Well at least thats the way I saw it, I'm sure many people out there might find the movie extremely slow or boring. But not me. To me, this movie was extremely creepy and realistic. Extremely well acted on Kinskys part and just an extremely cool visual trip.

If you're one of those persons that needs explosions and gunshots every five minutes steer clear away from this one, but in the other hand if you have an artistic side that can appreciate a beautiful film like this one then I highly recommended you check Nosferatu: The Vampire right away and experience the visual splendor of a Werner Herzog film.

Rating: 5 out of 5

34 out of 43 people found the following review useful:
Violent, sexy, 14 August 2006

Well, if blaxploitation films exploited the black culture and nunsploitation films exploit the nun image, then Sex and Fury falls under the sexploitation genre because it very decidedly exploits sex. And that ain't a bad thing in my book. Anyhows, Sex and Fury is a film that also falls under what is called Pinky Violence. Essentially what Pinky Violence is, is a bunch of Japanese films that came out in the 70s that dealt with hot lady killers who went out and distributed large amounts of vengeance on evil doers. It eventually died out, but boy what a legacy of films it left behind. Sex and Fury was one of the good ones.

The story is about this little girl called Ocho Inoshika. When Ocho sees her father get murdered right before her eyes by a bunch of Yakuza leaders she grows up to be a vengeful spirit. She does nothing else in this life but search for her fathers killers. And that she does, but not without helping a soul or two along the way.

At first when Sex and Fury started out, I thought it was going to be a rehash of the story I had seen before in the truly excellent Lady Snowblood. Its a very similar story dealing with a little girl who grows up to be a stone cold killer because she had an extremely traumatic childhood experience, but the only thing is that Sex and Fury amps up the sleaze and the tits and ass a whole lot more. Suddenly, without no apparent reason Ocho begins to fight and loose her clothes. Suddenly and without warning a bad guy slashes away the top part of her gown and Ocho begins to swordfight topless! Or in another sequence a bunch of hoodlums attack Ocho as she takes a bath and she proceeds to fight them buck naked! And not just a flash, I mean the fight sequence goes on for a long time and shes totally naked, gotta admit Id never seen that in a movie before, but it rocked! Of course it does add a level of sleaze to the movie because its obviously gratuitous nudity we are seeing here solely for the purpose of titillating the males in the audience. But so what, I gotta say it works.

So I'm like oooh, OK. So thats what this is all about! A movie that purposely shows a woman fighting and killing while naked. OK, I can go with that. But it wasn't only that. This movie has some sex scenes that scratch on being porn. Suddenly and without warning these two chicks start to make out on screen, necking each other. So I was thinking "thats probably as far as they are going to go with this cause this movie is old". Boy was I wrong, that sequence totally turned out to be an extended lesbo action sequence that was practically soft porn! I was like alright! This movie is pushing boundaries, its going all out and I dug that very very much. So be on the look out for certain kinky scenes.

And as for the violence, well its plentiful. Blood sprays body parts fall and the snow is sprinkled with red on more then one occasion. Its pretty freaking obvious this one was also a heavy influence on Tarantino. The whole ending sequence is extremely similar to Oren Ishii and Beatrix Kiddos showdown in Kill Bill Vol. 1. Both in terms of music and shots. It was crazy but I was having flashbacks. Anyhows that came as no surprise to me since I had heard about this movies and Lady Snowbloods influence on Tarantino.

The only thing that hinders this film a bit is the acting from Christina Lindberg an American actress that appears in this film playing an English spy. For those familiar with Grindhouse films, she appeared in another bad girl film called Thriller: A Cruel Picture. Anyhows Christina Lindberg does some pretty bad acting on this flick and it was really the only thing that kind of messed things up for me on this movie. But its a small imperfection on an otherwise cool flick.

So, if your into film with naked chicks going around on revenge killing sprees then this my friend is a film for you! I'm off to check out its sequel: Female Yakuza. Hope its every bit as good as this one.

Rating: 4 out of 5

Page 1 of 14:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [Next]