Reviews written by registered user

Page 1 of 2:[1] [2] [Next]
16 reviews in total 
Index | Alphabetical | Chronological | Useful

0 out of 2 people found the following review useful:
Ruins a cult classic, 12 September 2010

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

The original Cube was a smart film. It simply took several characters, all of them rather interesting, and stuck them in a deathtrap maze without a clue as to how they got there or who was responsible. The way they reacted to their situation and the way they related to each other was more interesting, and also the fact that each of them was put there in order to play a part in navigating the Cube's deathtraps was also another good element.

Cube 2 introduced a whole load of junk science into the concept, with traps relying on you accepting rooms featuring parallel universes and time dilation, basically stuff ripped off a bad Star Trek episode. It also tried to explain the Cube, and that was where things started to go wrong. The characters were the most interesting part, rather than bad special effects or conspiracy theories. It wasn't as good as the original, and should have stopped there.

Cube Zero is one of those sequels that just shouldn't have been made. It's also a prequel, and after The Phantom Menace we know that those don't turn out well. It tries to explain the Cube as apparently being some kind of laboratory for a repressive government to experiment on people, with anyone making it out being asked "if they believe in God", presumably the writers trying to add some kind of "political commentary" which doesn't gel very well.

We see the Cube technicians, one of whom tries to rescue a woman trapped in there, we see their bosses, we see all kinds of stuff that wasn't needed for the first film to be good. There's some villain played by the therapist from Being Erica who turns up and chews the scenery rather amusingly, and a few good deaths such as one caused by a disintegration trap at the beginning of the film in a manner reminiscent of the original Cube film. There is some entertainment value, but that's about it.

The original Cube director walked away from the franchise after finishing the first film, and he was right to do so. The first Cube film stands well on its own and needs no further exploration. To do so, as this one shows, just ruins the entire concept and insults the audience. Avoid.

3 out of 11 people found the following review useful:
A worthy sequel to Casino Royale, 31 October 2008

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Casino Royale was, without a doubt, the best Bond movie since the days of Sean Connery. It threw out the cheesy puns, gadgets and villain-with-doomsday-device bloat that marred the Brosnan and Moore films, and returned the films to a more basic approach, focusing on the James Bond character rather than explosive pens and invisible cars.

Quantum of Solace continues this approach, and for the most part, it works. It does indeed pick up five minutes after the end of Casino Royale, with Bond (Daniel Craig) being pursued by Mr. White's (Jesper Christensen) bodyguards, as he takes him back to an MI6 safehouse to be interrogated. After a rather traditional opening credits (think girls and guns going off), Bond spends the rest of the film tracking down the Quantum organisation's members and one of them in particular, phony environmentalist businessman Dominic Greene (Mathieu Amalric) who plans to monopolize Bolivia's water supply.

Daniel Craig continues to show why he's the best Bond since Connery. He portrays Bond as a cold, ruthless character imagined by Fleming. It's obvious that Bond is still suffering from the events of Casino Royale, and his pursuit of Greene pretty much manages to alienate him from most of his allies and leads to the deaths of several friends. There's not many bad puns, either, although the few that do make it in (remarking that a failed asssassin "reached a dead end") are delivered in a more serious fashion, rather than practically winking at the screen as Brosnan might have.

As for the rest of the characters, M (Judi Dench) seems to spend most of the film exasperated by Bond's vendetta, but manages to flesh out the character quite well, showing how she interacts with the rest of the UK government, and providing a few hints of M's personal life.

Camille (Olga Kurylenko) is a rather atypical Bond girl, focused on her own personal vendetta against deposed dictator General Medrano (Joaquin Cosio). Medrano is rather undeveloped, but Kurylenko's performance is quite refreshing, as she's probably the first Bond girl to be portrayed as being interested in doing something other than jumping Bond sighing "Oh James!" as soon as the end credits roll. Agent Fields (Gemma Arterton) doesn't really get much to do, but is the more "traditional" Bond girl in this film. Her oily fate is a clear reference to Goldfinger, but isn't as effective. Personally, I think Arterton might have been better for a reimagined Moneypenny, as Fields is apparently nothing more than a secretary, and you do find yourself wondering why MI6 would send an inexperienced clerk to sort out Bond.

Mathieu Amalric's Greene is a slippery, loathsome character who exhibits the same two-faced nature that many politicians possess these days. He's quite different from the usual scarred villain that Bond confronts, and would prefer to buy out his opponents rather than fighting them. The rather unskilled nature of Amalric makes a refreshing contrast from the physically formidable opponents of previous films, and in an odd way I felt rather sorry for him when he gets the stuffing beaten out of him due to Bond's superior fighting skills.

The film is a lot faster paced than many of the previous ones, with a minimum of "explain the villain's plot" scenes, and instead focusing on spectacular set pieces, such as a rather memorable plane chase, or the impressive explosion of a fancily designed hotel in the film's climax. The fight sequences are well orchestrated, and despite the globetrotting nature of the plot, there's never a moment when you feel bored. In shedding most of the old trappings of Bond, the film manages to still feel fresh after Royale, although it doesn't completely break with tradition.

It still has some of the traditional elements, such as the theme, and yes, the famous gunbarrel sequence. This latter series tradition appears to have been quite mobile in Craig's films: in Royale, it appears as the lead in to the opening credits, and here, it appears at the end of the film before the final credits. I've seen a lot of complaints about this on internet forums, but it didn't bother me personally. I'm guessing that the reason for the ending gunbarrel is that at the end of this film, we're left with a sense that Bond's become the more polished character we know from the other films. The gunbarrel sequence we see here is rather traditional (dots, Bond theme, walk followed by shooting and blood), so I'm guessing they'll stick this at the opening of the next film.

It doesn't manage to be quite as good as Royale, but that comes from the fact that it isn't rebooting a tired series, rather it's continuing in the vein of its predecessor, which isn't a bad thing at all. It's well worth seeing, although if you're one of those "Craig's Not Bond" people, I'd stay away, as the style of Moore and Brosnan seem well and truly a thing of the past.

Twin Town (1997)
1 out of 3 people found the following review useful:
Bendegedig (fantastic in Welsh), 5 September 2008

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Some like to call Twin Town the "Welsh Trainspotting". I would disagree - while it has some similarities such as prolific drug use and a bleak portrayal of a city in the United Kingdom (in this case Swansea, with bits of Port Talbot), the two films are quite different.

Twin Town takes place in 90s Swansea, where brothers Julian (Llyr Ifans) and Jeremy Lewis (Rhys Ifans) live a carefree existence smoking weed and driving stolen cars at high speed through the residential areas of Swansea. Their father, Fatty (Huw Ceredig) does work for local businessman and small-time gangster Bryn Cartwright (William Thomas), and falls from a ladder and breaks his leg while working on a roof. Bryn refuses to give the family compensation for Fatty's injury, and the brothers take revenge by urinating on his daughter, Bonny (Jenny Evans) during a singing competition at the local (sadly, now-defunct) nightclub, Barons.

This starts off an escalating feud which involves the decapitation of a poodle, and the surprisingly massive explosion of a caravan, culminating in some rather brutal justice inflicted on Bryn and his partner in crime, corrupt cop Terry Walsh (Dougray Scott). I'm not going to go and spoil the entire thing, but what I will say is that things take a rather dark turn, with Julian and Jeremy showing a rather unexpected creative mind for murder, especially given that they appear to be just permanently wasted.

As a Swansea resident, I have to say that while the drug use in the film is exaggerated, it does capture the seedier side of Swansea quite well. The scenes of Swansea's nightlife are perhaps too accurate (anyone who has been to Wind Street at its worst will know what I mean), and the accent and rather, erm, colourful way that the characters speak is spot on. It also, however, captures some of the more beautiful aspects of the city, namely its heart (although the Lewis family are dysfunctional, they have a very warm family dynamic), and also the beautiful scenery in the area (visible in the panoramic shots of the city), and I think that any Welshman couldn't watch the funeral scene at the end as the choir sings "Myfanwy" without wiping away a tear.

I saw that the film got quite a few bad reviews on the net (and indeed on here). I think possibly some might not get the accents, or indeed the feel of the film - ultimately, to really enjoy the film, you have to have lived in Swansea to get the most out of it, as if you have, a particular location or character will tie in with certain memories you have of the place, whereas otherwise, it might not.

It's most definitely worth checking out, and add another star if you're from Swansea!

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:
You'll want to believe this could have been better!, 1 August 2008

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

So, six years after The X-Files ended its nine-year run, Twentieth Century Fox decide to resurrect the old series in an attempt to begin a movie franchise. This was done in a very secretive way, with all manner of things being done to keep this movie secret. (I heard the Secret Service were even called in at one point to investigate spoiler leaks!) In retrospect, it really wasn't worth it. After all the secrecy and hype, this relaunch is a bit of a damp squib. It isn't an appalling film, but considering the pedigree of the series that preceded it, it could have been so much better.

I'm going to give the main plot of the film here, because well, it's nothing special compared to the rest of it. Look away now if you really feel the need not to know...

Father Joe (Billy Connolly), a "psychic" ex-priest thrown out of the church for being a paedophile, is having visions of a series of murders of women, carried out by a rich Russian gay couple who are trying to save the life of one of them who has cancer, and was abused by said paedophile as a child. They hope to do this by chopping the head off a woman, and then transplanting the man's head onto a woman's body, motivated by an ill-explained bit of pseudoscience.

That is it - a plot that could have been wrapped up in one of the series more forgettable 45 minute episodes. The sad thing about this movie is that some of the plots from the series eclipse this in scope, despite the fact that it's meant to be a big-screen version of the series. Take "Colony"/"End Game", a great two-parter involving an alien cloning conspiracy, which has plenty of action and twists, and has a thrilling conclusion involving a fight on board a stranded submarine in the Arctic Circle. That would have made a great movie.

Or, as this is meant to be one of the stand alone ones, how about "Firewalker", a tale of parasitic entities from inside the Earth destroying a geology experiment at a volcano? Or "The Host", an episode written by Chris Carter, involving a sewer mutant? Or "Tooms", the famous joint popping, liver eating serial killer? All of these former episodes dwarf "I Want To Believe", and they were made for less money.

As for the B-plot, Scully (Gillian Anderson) is now working at a hospital, and is being given a tough time by her boss, priest Father Ybarra (Adam Godley), who wants to move a dying boy into a hospice despite Scully's protests that she thinks she can cure him. So, Scully's having a rough time at work, and then runs home and whines about it to Mulder (David Duchovny) who appears to fill his days by cutting stories about UFOs and ESP out of news papers and sticking it on a wall. That's right - the "new and unexpected directions" the film takes M&S's relationship in is: the boring domestic life of Mulder and Scully! It's like Chris Carter went and read some of the more yawn-inducing shipper fiction out there, and then incorporated it into his screenplay. In fact, probably out there a few of the now grown up hormonal teenage girls that wrote the ship fiction in the 90s are probably screaming with rage that he stole their idea. Mulder and Scully are practically married now (although not officially - she denies it in one scene), and a large portion of their scenes together are taken up by Scully moaning about how her new found domestic bliss is going to be ruined by having her boyfriend chasing after monsters again. There's even a scene where they talk about their non-existent sex life and she complains about his scratchy beard. This part of the plot is just plain lame, and is why Carter didn't give in to the shippers during the series.

I also found myself wondering why the FBI brings Mulder back, saying "all is forgiven", when it wasn't really the FBI he was running from - it was the alien conspiracy! I guess the aliens just got bored and leaving Mulder with his whiny girlfriend was punishment enough.

Despite the amount of things that aren't that hot, there are some good elements. During the scenes when Scully and Mulder are investigating the case and not having a lover's tiff, it's pretty evocative of the old spirit of the series. And Anderson and Duchovny do pretty much manage to become Mulder and Scully again after six years of doing different roles, albeit with a heavy dose of shipper influence added.

Ultimately, it's quite disappointing, but there are one or two things in it for you if you're a fan. Really, though, I'd wait till it's on DVD - perhaps that's the way it should have been released.

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:
Dude, like totally awesome..., 8 July 2008

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Cartoon All-Stars to the Rescue has to be one of the most hilarious things I have ever seen. It's an anti-drug video from the early 90s, where a bunch of media companies (Disney, Warner Bros, etc) teamed up to produce a cartoon special to tell kids that drugs are bad.

However, it soon becomes obvious that the kid's sister is pretty whacked out on drugs as well, despite her trying to persuade him to drop the drugs habit...

The kid, Michael, is smoking marijuana, and steals money from his sister, Corey, in order to get money for drugs. At that point, something truly weird happens and the cartoon characters dotted around Corey's bedroom come to life, and end up trying to "wake her up". Pooh Bear then talks to her (which couldn't happen... unless you're tripping...), and tells her to go and see her parents about his drug problem (but not about her problems, which are obvious because she's hallucinating a bear talking to her).

Michael goes to his "friends" who are smoking weed, and they take his wallet to buy crack. Then... then he appears to embark on a psychedelic journey where various cartoon characters talk to him, complete with glowing colours, and Michaelangelo the Ninja Turtle who appears to endorse drugs by calling him "cool". All along the way there's this character called "Smoke" which I guess is meant to represent his addiction to drugs. The other characters try to fight him off, and finally Michael manages to get rid of him when his sister tries to take drugs (although given she's seeing Smoke and Pooh Bear talking to her, she's riding the acid train already...). They then go and talk to his mom and dad about his problem. I guess they'd better get the sister to 'fess up too judging by what she was seeing. In fact, these people are pretty bad if they're letting both their kids get this messed up.

It basically is a piece of corporate propaganda - stern moralising via out-of-touch "cool" methods, in the way that dominated the 90s (see Don't Copy That Floppy...). In that respect it failed - drug use has indeed become a fact of life, seen in video games, films and TV shows, and being portrayed in a much more realistic way than the horror stories shown in this. Indeed, I would say that it would push kids in the opposite way - the message here is that if you take these drugs, your favourite cartoon characters will pop up out of boxes and magazines to see you and tell you about drugs! It's worth watching for the sheer hilarity of seeing squeaky clean cartoon characters express familiarity with drugs. It's hilarious for the fact that drugs apparently make you look like the Plastic Prince of Pop. And it's also hilarious just that anyone in a boardroom might think that anyone, child or adult, would take this seriously.

Fortress (1992)
0 out of 2 people found the following review useful:
A fairly entertaining sci-fi action film, 22 March 2008

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

The year is 2017, and apparently due to overpopulation the United States has become a totalitarian country enforcing a China-style one child per couple law. John Brennick (Christopher Lambert) and his wife Karen (Loryn Locklin) are trying to flee the US for Mexico, as Karen has become pregnant again after losing their first child. They are caught, however, and imprisoned in the Fortress, a massive underground prison facility run by the evil Men-Tel Corporation. Brennick has to come up with a plan to escape the prison and save his wife, while contending with the evil Prison Director Poe (Kurtwood Smith) and his AI sidekick Zed-10 (voice of Carolyn Purdy-Gordon).

Fortress is a pretty silly film, but as with most things starring Christopher Lambert, enjoyably silly. The other actors are mostly wallpaper - Lambert's character is pretty much the focus of the film, and he rolls out an entertaining variant on the Connor McLoed character that made his career. He fights people, fires a gun at the strange mutant prison guards, and at some point you're expecting him to proclaim "There can be only one!".

Entertainment can also be found from the strange performance of Kurtwood Smith as Director Poe. He seems to be obsessed with the sexual dreams of the inmates, which he observes via the prison's built in mind probe, and has a tame, sexless relationship with Brennick's wife who he coerces into living in comfortable quarters with him, rather than the prison. His motives aren't really that convincing - he states he wants to know what love is, but also that he can't have sex, so you just wonder what's the point.

There's also a strange plot about cutting open pregnant women and turning their babies into mutants (of which Poe is one) that never seems to go anywhere. But the plot isn't really the point of the film. It's just a massively silly film that you can enjoy with your brain switched off, where you can laugh at the oddly toothless villains, and just enjoy the B-movieness of it all.

If you want a silly film to enjoy/laugh at on a Saturday night, you could do far worse than Fortress.

Popeye (1980)
1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:
Weird, but oddly entertaining in places, 20 October 2007

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I saw this film a while back, and was reminded of it upon coming across the 'Popeye vs Ecoli' video on Youtube. Upon viewing it again recently, the thing that struck me is despite the fact that I hated it the first time, the second time around it is oddly entertaining in places, just for the downright weird nature of the film.

The story is a prequel to all of the cartoons, telling how Popeye and all the assorted characters met. Popeye (Robin Williams) comes to the town of Sweethaven searching for his father, and rents a room at the Oyl's house, falling in love with their daughter, Olive (Shelley DuVall), and making an enemy of Bluto (Paul L. Smith). They find a baby who can predict the future, and Bluto schemes to use him to find some treasure. Popeye finds his father, Poopdeck Pappy (Ray Walson), and defeats Bluto and wins over Olive after discovering that spinach gives him super strength.

It is a really, really weird film. A complete village was built for it, and it's obvious a lot of thought went into it, but it's just odd to see people pretending to be cartoon characters. There are several moments that are oddly jarring for a children's film, such as Popeye uttering an expletive (earning this a PG), and also a song where Olive says how Bluto isn't really that much, but "he's large". These moments left me confused as to who the target audience actually is, as it appears to be trying to tell the story in a semi-serious vein, rather than being a sendup of the Popeye franchise.

It also appears that they ran out of money at the end, as the finale, involving Olive being menaced by an evil octopus, is rather shoddy, with the octopus looking rather fake and plastic compared with other films of the 1980s.

That said, if you like Robin Williams' aptitude for voices, his performance does capture Popeye quite well, and he pretty much is the source of most of the film's limited entertainment value. And it also is sort of ahead of its time with the entire prequel film/cartoon to film craze going on right now.

In short, it is intriguing, but not really that great a film.

1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:
A slight case of too many villains spoil the broth, 5 May 2007

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Spider-Man 3 has to be one of the most hyped movies in history - and with expectations high, I went into it expecting it to be the best of the Spider-Man films.

However, upon emerging from the cinema, while not totally disappointed, I wasn't completely satisfied either. There was something missing from this one that was missing from the other two.

The main reason behind this is that this being the most expensive and ambitious of the three, the writers thought they could shoehorn in a lot more plot into two and a bit hours than they really could.

The story takes inspiration from the alien symbiont plot of the comics, where Spider-Man's suit turns black after bonding with an alien life-form, giving him increased power, but also bringing out his aggressive side. He becomes a bit of a jerk (he doesn't do anything really dark, apart from trying to annoy MJ), decides he needs to get rid of the suit by tearing it off in a belltower, at which point it bonds with Eddie Brock, who becomes Venom.

Now this would make for enough of a movie on its own, but the Sandman is also introduced. It turns out he really killed Peter's Uncle Ben, and Spider-Man thus goes out for revenge. And talking about revenge, Harry Osborn becomes the New Goblin and tries to kill Peter.

This is the problem with the film: it tries to combine three stories that could make an entire film themselves into one. None of the villains feels as fleshed out as Doc Ock or the first Green Goblin were, and thus you don't really feel that involved with the story. The effects are spectacular, especially the final Spider-Man/Harry Osborn vs Sandman/Venom fight, but they don't make up for the fact that there are just too many things going on at one time. Drop either Venom or Sandman, and the film would have been better. You could still have room for the entire Harry/New Goblin thing, and do the remaining primary villain of the film justice.

In the end, the film is slightly disappointing, but does have some rather good moments typical of the others, such as Bruce Campbell's cheesy French stereotype waiter, or the rather daft but hilarious dance sequence in the jazz club.

Spider-Man 3 is good, but could have been a lot better had one of the two primary villains been shunted over to the next one, where they could have been fleshed out more and made more interesting.

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:
A second sequel that's an inferior remake of the original, 14 March 2007

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

You know a film franchise is running out of ideas when the producers decide to churn out a new film that essentially retells the story of the old one, but badly. I recently rewatched the first Highlander, and saw the two sequels for the first time and came to the conclusion that yes, there should really only have been one.

The core concept behind Highlander is a good one: immortal warriors fighting over centuries until only one is left, who will win the Prize, the nature of which varies over the various entries of the franchise, but is usually described as the power of all immortals who ever lived. The only way an Immortal can be killed is by removal of the head, usually via sword.

This made for a good film: an epic story spanning hundreds of years, cool swordfights and a good performance from Christopher Lambert made the original Highlander one of the better 1980s films out there. At the end of the film, he had supposedly won the Prize, and that was that.

However, because it was so successful, it spawned sequels: the hilariously bad Highlander II, and the one being reviewed, Highlander III: The Sorcerer.

The film starts with Connor MacLoed (Christopher Lambert) going to Japan a couple of hundred years ago to learn from the sorcerer Nakano who has the handy ability to make illusions appear from thin air. Nakano is also being hunted by Kane(Mario van Peebles), a villain who is virtually a carbon copy of the Kurgan (is a barbarian, likes to kill women and children, etc) who wants the power of illusion to do bad things. Kane catches up with Nakano, Connor escapes and Kane is buried in Nakano's cave.

Skip forward a few hundred years: Connor is living with his adopted son in some Middle Eastern country, until Kane is released from a cave by an archaeologist obsessed with ancient Japan (a variant on the love interest from the first film). Connor becomes aware that Kane is back, and then goes back to New York to kill Kane. Apparently he didn't win the Prize after all, and is in actual fact an Immortal who thinks he is mortal (which he was meant to become at the end of the first film). What follows is pretty much a retelling of the first film. There are two scenes that are really blatant copies of ones from the first film: Kane taunts Connor on holy ground where Immortals cannot fight. The first time he does this they fight and they actually explain what happens when you do fight on holy ground, and the second time is virtually the same as the scene with the Kurgan in the church in the first film.

The second time you get a sense of deja vu is when Kane kidnaps Connor's son, and then proceeds to drive around terrifying him by playing chicken with various vehicles. The exact same scene was in the first film, when the Kurgan kidnaps Connor's love interest and speeds through New York. However, any sense of danger in the scene in the third film is removed by the fact that all of the things Kane pretends to collide with are illusions, which cannot actually harm the occupants of the car.

Connor and Kane fight, Connor kills Kane, and then wins the Prize again, at least until the next sequel Highlander: Endgame, which at least was trying to do something new. And even the effects of Connor's quickening (the process by which Immortals take the power of those they have killed) were just lifted from the first film and cleaned up a bit. It's just plain lazy film-making.

Mario van Peebles makes for a rather camp and unthreatening villain as Kane, who you never believe Connor will have any difficulty in defeating. He does try in some places make his performance different from that of the Kurgan, but the script demands he attempts to mimic the first film's villain.

Christopher Lambert just seems rather bored throughout the film, which isn't surprising as he contemplated walking off of Highlander II (which he made through gritted teeth). He probably only agreed to appear in this due to getting a rise and the prospect of some easy money. The other actors are rather forgettable.

I sometimes persevere with a bad film if it makes me laugh. Highlander III did manage this, but only in a few bits. Most of the time it just bored me, and the only reason I didn't put it off was so I wouldn't ever want to waste more time watching it at a later date. It isn't really worth bothering with as such - the first film or Highlander: Endgame are better choices. Of course, if you have the boxset, then you already have it, so I'd advise you watch one of the other three films. They are all better than this tired cash-in.

A rather bad B-movie, redeemed by giant lizards, 3 July 2006

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I watched this movie this morning, and I have to say it is one of the worse 1950s sci-fi films I have ever seen. The only redeeming feature of the film is that in the end, it has some truly hilarious footage of men with googly ping-pong ball eyes, but that's about it.

The dull plot centres around a scientist whose job it is to monitor nuclear testing. Something goes wrong, his plane crashes, and while his pilot dies, he survives, but can't really remember anything.

I then went and read for the rest of the film, as I lost interest. It was all pretty samey really, and seemed to involve something about stealing nuclear plans and putting them under a rock in a quarry. The only reason why I kept on watching was because the listings promised giant insects.

Well, eventually the scientist undergoes hypnotic regression, and then tells the story of how he was brought back to life by men in jumpsuits and ping-pong ball with black bits painted on them for eyes. Apparently, these people want to destroy our planet and repopulate it for some reason or other. And they want to do it through the way all other aliens want to destroy Earth in B-movies: Giant animals! That's probably the best part of the film, where the hero runs through several stock footage scenes of bored looking bearded lizards, tarantulas, crickets and gila monsters. He's trying his best to look scared, they just look as if they want a nap. It's a fairly good laugh though, just for his chronic overacting, and the crude nature of his superimposing onto the film of the creatures.

Eventually, they let him go, and he cuts off their power, at which point they blow up in a piece of US Government public domain stock footage of nuclear tests.

Most of the film is bad, but if you have a TiVo, or get this on DVD for some reason, fast forward to the last half-hour of the film for some truly hilarious bad monster footage (which is why this gets five stars). The rest is just bad... not funny bad, but just crappy bad.

Page 1 of 2:[1] [2] [Next]