Reviews written by registered user
mrush

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

Page 1 of 13:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [Next]
124 reviews in total 
Index | Alphabetical | Chronological | Useful

Blood Ranch (2006) (V)
2 out of 6 people found the following review useful:
what junk, 19 October 2011
2/10

Yet another DVD box that promised all sorts of depravity and ended up not even showing a breast.

More silly kids end up out in the desert. They stumble into this compound of a bunch of sheds and huts wherein roam several mental defectives who are led by a guy called Spider. While all kinds of brutality and mayhem is promised on the box,other than a woman getting her arm hacked off not much depravity is shown.

Special effects are minimal. The acting is horrible. The script is worse. More homemade crap from Xenon.Anyone with a video camera and some red colored corn syrup could make something like this. That doesn't mean they should.

9 out of 10 people found the following review useful:
Homemade zombie muck, 10 April 2010
2/10

Oh another zombie movie that blew chunks.Imagine that.This movie promised the world on the DVD box but little did I know that this was another of those 8 Days of Horror or whatever they call it.Any of those movies I've saw were awful and this one was no exception.

First off I've no idea what the title means.It wasn't explained.After seeing this puke pile I'm guessing this homemade piece of junk was just given some weird mysterious nonsense title to give it a bit of class or mystique or whatever.

Anyway the mean old US government was doing more experiments in some little town on dead bodies to try and bring them back to life so they could fight our wars for us.Seriously.That was the reason given for this wave of zombies.The experimental zombies were released as a test and naturally and of course the experiment goes wrong.These zombies were made to be stronger and faster and able to think by the experiments so it was a bad decision to let these things loose on purpose it would seem.

Zombies run amok while a group of teens,the only ones left alive,run around trying to stay away from them.

Boy this thing stunk to high heaven.The acting was horrible.The script was worse.Special effects were clunky and badly done and just sort of thrown in here and there as opposed to sort of happening naturally during the course of the movie.These zombies were strong enough to rip heads and legs off yet seemed to be stopped by someone closing a door and turning the little lock on the knob.The continuity from scene to scene was a mess.The teens would run out the front door when a zombie came in the back way yet just a second ago they had ran in that very same front door with a swarm of zombies right behind them.The action jumped from scenes that looked to be out in the middle of nowhere to city scenes with no explanation of how the characters got transplanted so fast.

The camera was slashed around so fast during the fight scenes it was just impossible to follow what was happening.I eventually gave up trying.There's nothing really positive to say about this clunker.The info I read about this thing says it was shot in 9 days.From the way this mess turned out I would have guessed 4 days. This pile of garbage even ends with the words "To be continued..." on the screen.

It felt like I was watching a two part episode of "The Beverly Hillbillies" or something,like when the Hillbillies went to England when they learned they owned a castle over there and they just couldn't get all the Jethro fighting a dragon jokes in a one 30 minute episode,I see the reason for doing a TV show like that but who ends a movie like that?And to beat it all I read there was a Part 2.Anymore no matter how bad and unwatched the first one was they always convince themselves someone wants a Part 2 of it.

This was just another homemade piece of junk from people who have little talent for horror movies.Too bad today's technology is so easy that everyone who used to think they could write the next great American novel now thinks they can make the next great zombie movie.

Just because you got a camera and you can do a little CG on a computer doesn't mean you got any movie making talent.

1 out of 3 people found the following review useful:
typical low budget crap, 1 March 2010
4/10

Yeah I know----its by Coppola.We don't review names here ,we review movies and as a movie this one was pretty bad. But if you want me to review Coppola I will -----Godfather I and II are good,Apocalypse Now is great and the rest of his stuff is average . Anyway in this movie the setting is a castle in Ireland. A woman and her 3 sons live in the gloomy castle that hasn't seen a happy day since the woman' s daughter drowned in the pond 7 years ago. Two American woman who are involved with 2 of the brothers also fall prey to the gloom and madness of the castle. All in all this film was a typical low budget mess---boom mics seen overhead and if not the mic itself its shadow was seen frequently. My favorite scene was when one of the women stripped off to her bra and panties to go into the pond. Her bra and panties are white as she approaches the water but the next scene in the water her panties were black. The unexplained color change was no doubt due to a see thru issue. People were killed or disappeared never to show up again but life went on in the dull castle without anyone becoming too alarmed at the goings on. Nothing of greatness or genius here----just another piece of low budget crap produced by Roger Corman that just happens to be directed by someone who you've actually heard of,Francis Ford Coppola. As for Coppola,its hard to find anything he has directed since about 1985 that is much better than this over hyped mess.

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:
It petered out, 19 December 2009
4/10

I thought this movie was gonna be good.It starts out at least looking a bit promising but then just when it finally gets to some good stuff it ends leaving you feeling unsatisfied and kind of mad.And let me add that this movie has absolutely nothing to do with Guns N Roses.

2 couples set out to find the missing Michael Rockefeller ,who disappeared into the jungles of New Guinea in 1961 and was never heard from again.A rumor from a bush pilot sends the four out into the jungle to find Rockefeller and get rich and famous doing it.After one of the four steals some bones from a burial site the local natives get ticked off.But they might have anyway,who knows? This movie has nothing original to offer.We've seen the cannibal movies before and we've seen the shaky hand held movie documentary style filming before.My question with these supposed self shot movies is would a person really keep filming even after they realize their life is in danger ?Really? You gonna keep the camera light on out in the middle of the jungle at night with headhunters all around?I kinda think I'm gonna shut it off and hide like the sniveling coward I am.

Anyway the movie goes along fine and then all of a sudden it's sort of wraps up all quick like and the credits roll.Did you boys run out of money or did you get tired of filming out in the hot jungle?It just abruptly quits before any good gore or terror gets going.

Some night time quick glimpses of some gore is about it.No nudity at all even though you got 4 hot young folks out in the middle of nowhere taking swims and sunbathing and stuff like that.

I can't recommend this movie ,it just never delivers on it's promise of terror and gore.

3 out of 4 people found the following review useful:
Garbage, 19 December 2009
2/10

This is another low budget piece of crap zombie movie from Lionsgate.

A few people hold up in an abandoned military installation after a comet hits the Earth and causes most humans to turn into zombies.There is some talk of reproduction and some poking around in the crotches of the zombies and a bunch of other silly stuff.I guess the genital exams was an attempt to try and do something different in a zombie movie.The DVD box boasts "2 billion zombies" but we end up seeing only about 2 dozen poorly made up zombies in this puke pile of a movie.

The plot doesn't make sense .The gore is phony looking and pretty mild.One set of very small breasts are shown and that's about the most interesting thing this sorry mess of a movie had to offer.

It's to the point once you see those big metal gears turning when the Lionsgate logo starts that you might as well hit the eject button and get the DVD out cause you know it's gonna blow.

Freakshow (2007) (V)
3 out of 3 people found the following review useful:
What a rotten mess, 13 December 2009
3/10

Well once again a DVD box at the rental store drew me into a wasted night.Who could resist a movie that claims to have been banned in 37 countries?So ,even though by now I should know better,I rent this thing and take it home.

So we have a traveling circus and one of the attractions is the freaks or strange people as I think the sign on the tent said.Also traveling with the circus is the support group of guards and mechanics etc.Anyway a few of these support guys and a girl decide to rob the circus during it's travels.The group decides that the girl should cozy up to the owner and trick him into marrying her where the group of plotters will have access to his fortune.Apparently the owner of this fleabag circus has big money somewhere although looking at him you'd never figure. The owner is a repulsive mess,bad teeth,greasy hair and big yellow boils all over his body.

The boil covered owner of the circus feels more at home with the freaks of the show than he does with normal people.He considers them his family.His family protects him as one of their own when they feel he is in trouble.Therein lies the main plot I guess you'd say.

This movie really sucked bad.It was just too much for me to believe that the beautiful young women would have sex with the oozing nasty owner for all the money in the world.She was so hot she could have found a much cleaner and less repulsive sugar daddy.The sets were lousy shots of tents and the Ferris wheel was shown over and over.There never seemed to be any people at the circus and all the workers just sat around slurping beer from bottles that somehow came with no labels on them.And the sound track was the most irritating soundtrack of any movie I've ever seen....one after another of bad fakey attempts to recreate old scratchy songs like they sounded on records made in the 20's and 30's.On and on these miserable songs went until I was nearly mad.

And the acting was bad.Terribly bad.And I'm not even sure this movie had a script as many of the actors seemed to fumble for their words.Or maybe the budget was so tight that re shots weren't allowed?The freaks themselves weren't really all that freaky except for the one that looked like a miniature version of the Toxic Avenger.Special effects were minimal,little bit of gore near the end but for the most part this movie was just people doing mostly talking.A couple of women showed their breasts but they were small and uninspiring.I think I gave it a 3 mostly because of the breasts because really this movie was probably a 1 or 2 at best.

It's very apparent that this movie was nothing more than a sad weak blatant rip-off of Tod Browning's "Freaks".This mess is totally forgettable and I probably wouldn't have even finished watching it had it not been a cold rainy day with nothing else going on for me to do.

The only way this crapola was banned in 37 countries was for being so bad.Skip this crud fest and watch Browning's original.

1 out of 6 people found the following review useful:
An episode quoted by millions of guys, 16 September 2009
10/10

All you need to know about this episode is ever since it aired,millions of guys all across the country,are still saying " That's what she said" to millions of other guys every time one of them says something as innocent as "That sure is a big engine" or "I've got a sore throat" or "You'll need a ladder to reach that".

It never gets old and it's always funny.I'll use "That's what she said" at least 2 dozen times a week myself.

My wife doesn't get it...most women don't get it.But every time my friends and I use it at work we laugh long and hard---That's what she said.

2 out of 4 people found the following review useful:
Decent Western, 22 August 2009
5/10

This is a pretty standard run of the mill western...good guy versus bad guy.It had way too many clichés to be considered a good film but it is watchable if not too much else is on at the time.The film is sort of mis-titled,I didn't see too much 'terror' ,just a whole lot of standard oater stuff.

Sterling Hayden is quite good has a Swedish man who comes to America to a small town in Texas after his father is killed there.Hayden comes to the USA to inherit his fathers' land but finds out that the local mean big wig is buying up all the land and he has the local sheriff on his side to convince people they should pack up and move.The big meanie,played by Sebastion Cabot,also has a gunslinger,dressed in all black and black must be terribly hot in summertime in Texas, that helps convince the locals to give up their land to Mr.French.Of course Cabot ain't playing Mr.French in this movie ,but to this kid who grew up in the 1960's watching "Family Affair" he will always be Mr.French. Anyway the big Swede don't take too kindly to anyone pushing him around and he soon runs afoul of the local bad guys who want his land.

The movie isn't too bad nor too good.It just sort of plods it's way along to the predictable conclusion although I will give it points for being at least a little bit original in the final showdown.You'll see a few familiar faces besides Hayden and Cabot...some of those faces you'll remember from TV shows like "The Andy Griffin Show" and "Green Acres".

This movie was OK .I gave it a 5.But honestly if I catch it on AMC again I'd probably flip on by it.It's good enough to see once but not nearly good enough to sit through twice.

District 9 (2009)
4 out of 11 people found the following review useful:
Great trailers,dull movie, 16 August 2009
6/10

I loved the trailers for this movie and really made an effort to go see it when it the first weekend it came out.I rarely go see movies at theaters and almost never try to go the first weekend one opens but this one looked cool so I gave up a Saturday night to go see it.

A huge alien spacecraft becomes disabled and its one million occupants ,yes one million,are put in camps,sort of like the camps where human refugees are put now.The big mother craft just hangs up in the sky low to the ground unable to move.Soon the camps become like any other camp where beings are forced to live in squalid conditions--crime ridden and violence filled hell holes.The aliens are sort of big insect looking things.Most of the movie is told from the viewpoint of the man who was put in charge of relocating the aliens when the camp becomes too much of a problem being located near a large human population.

I didn't really understand why a million of these things would be flying around in space and how you would get a million in the spacecraft they came to Earth with.Their home planet apparently wasn't destroyed because some of the more industrious aliens were trying to get back to the mother ship and fix it so they could get back home.And they can build this incredible massive flying craft then they appear stupid and lazy when the are in the camps....eating cans of cat food which were used as currency in some cases,and also eating old tires.The whole cat food business was just stupid and silly and distracting.I think I would have liked the movie better had the aliens been more menacing,instead of the dullards they were.

The film is done in a sort of documentary type although it doesn't hold too strictly to this style.The action is good when it finally starts and the special effects are pretty cool with space guns that explode people and stuff like that.And the big space craft looked cool hanging in the sky.But overall the movie was rather bland and boring in dealing with this problem of space alien refugees.

Maybe the whole point was to deal with these aliens like we humans deal with other human refugees but if you are going to do that why use space aliens? This wasn't a bad film.It just didn't live up to it's potential and certainly not to it's trailers.I wish I had my $8.25 back I paid to see this movie.That would rent me 4 DVDs of movies that would be at least,if not more,interesting than this movie was.

I gave this movie a six which to me means a decent watchable film but nothing that you'll remember as being extraordinary enough to go out and buy when it's released to DVD.

Splinter (2008/I)
0 out of 2 people found the following review useful:
Nothing I ain't seen before, 26 July 2009
6/10

I had saw this film hyped on G4 and elsewhere and was pleased to come across it on the shelf of my local rental store.There is only about a 5% chance that I'll find a horror film that I really want to see at the local hole in the wall rental place I go to but such is the drawback of living in a small town.Not getting shot in the head by a gang is one of the many pluses of a small town versus the big city.

Anyway 2 couple get trapped in an isolated gas station after some sort of weird spiny thing,who used to be the local yokel gas jockey,attack them.They figure out that there is some sort of parasite taking over living people who get all spiny looking and move all herky jerky and attack uninfected humans.

The trapped people have a good assortment of weapons and gadgets being trapped in a gas station but between their wounds and their cowardice the outcome is still not assured.

Like a lot of other horror films this one was over hyped quite a bit.The special effects were pretty well done although the spiny beings were filmed with quick slashing shots that didn't linger on them too long.This wild camera work made it hard to follow the action sometimes when the pace picked up.This also tells me instead of taking the time to create some cool looking special effects creatures the film makers took the easy way out by using cameras and computers....cheaper yes but also fake looking ...you get what you pay for.

The gore is sparse and again done with those annoying quick slashes of the camera.No nudity but there is quite a bit of four letter words used during the heat of battle.

The film is tense and competently made well enough but it just ends up being another run of the mill horror film that you'll quickly forget.The way this one ended I'm sure that Part Two is already in the can and coming to a local rental store near you.No doubt it too will be over hyped because of the "greatness" of this film.


Page 1 of 13:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [Next]