Reviews written by registered user
Deliberate_Stranger

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

Page 1 of 4:[1] [2] [3] [4] [Next]
35 reviews in total 
Index | Alphabetical | Chronological | Useful

Crosshairs (2013)
11 out of 14 people found the following review useful:
Could have been good..., 7 June 2013
3/10

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Believe it or not but I really wanted to like this movie. Waited for a DVD release, pre-ordered and then, when it finally arrived, I can't believe how the good storyline was wasted. On paper everything looks good but that's it. I have no idea why film drags for 2 hours when it should be maximum 80 minutes long and then, maybe there would be more tension in it. Because it is that long, it has to rely on acting and here comes the biggest failure. Leading actor Robert Seay is just beyond terrible. For the first few minutes I thought he will do just fine. Contract killer doesn't have to look tough after all. However, just after those few minutes I realized how big failure of an actor he is. Emotional scenes don't exist because this guy can't act. He's trying to look tough, talk tough and act tough but he's not tough, he's not smart and he just makes you laugh like hell when you see him trying. With a lead like that, your movie has to sink. Rest of the cast is pretty much horrible like that but it doesn't show that much because they usually appear on screen for a minute or less. There is however one man, doing his job right. It's Mark Rolston, fantastic actor who's trying to save this film. He can't do that because he's alone and his screen time is limited to few scenes. It's hard to say if he's a good guy or the bad guy after all but Mark does his job with charisma as usual. Tom Sizemore is top billed but to any fans out there(if he still have some fans that is) -he appears in one scene only. This scene however have to be seen to be believed. Not because he's doing great job but because he's high as hell. Yup, we all know Tom likes drugs and it doesn't bother me at all if he does them in his free time but being so high on the set is just...wrong. If you ever wondered why he's not in a big movies anymore - here is your answer. He has a monologue here and it could sound well if provided by other name actor but it wasn't. I hope his name helped to sell the film because his acting was just plain horrible. Kodi Kitchen is a leading lady and to be honest she does a fair job. She's not that much of an actress but around so many amateurs, she shines. 'Crosshairs' tries to be a thriller but there is no tension at all. There is action at all. If you expect any shootouts, fights or anything like that - forget it. All they do is talk. Leading guy fires his gun two or three times during the whole film, no one else tries to. I'm giving it 3 stars for Mark Rolston and because technically it looks good. If you want to skip any action and base your film on acting, you need to have a good actors. Otherwise it doesn't make sense.

9 out of 13 people found the following review useful:
Robin Hood : The Ghosts of no Budget..., 19 December 2012
3/10

I have to say, I was looking forward to see this movie since I first heard of it. Storyline seemed to be really interesting. Finally I was able to catch the German DVD release of 'Robin Hood: Ghosts of Sherwood' and I must say it was a huge letdown for me. The biggest problem with the movie is It's non existing budget. They shot it in 3D which was probably quite expensive alone but sorry to say, it was just a waste of money and those money could(and should) be spent on something else. You simply can't do a movie set in a medieval times with knights, sword fights etc without the real budget. It's not about putting 4 guys in the armors, give them fake swords and tell to 'make an impression'. I knew from the beginning that It's gonna be really bad movie, when I saw sword fights(well 'fight' is not an accurate word) in the first 5 minutes. There was no choreography whatsoever and it looked so amateurish it hurts. It reminded me various 'castle tournaments' I have seen many times. The difference is, those shows were done for 5 years old kids and no one cared how badly they looked but this is a movie, serious one....well at least it tries to be. IMDb states that budget was around 200 000 euros which is impossible, highly doubt it could be more expensive than 100k, rather less. It was shot in Germany and must I say - locations look great. The forest is really interesting, castle looks cool so does the river but unfortunately the locations and a score are the only good things about this film. Since it was shot in Germany, it has German cast and the director decided to go with English dubbing which unfortunately doesn't work and is superbly annoying. It would work better if the makers would go and hire German actors who could actually speak in English. Most of the cast are amateurs(director's friends I guess) and we have two exceptions. FX Legend Tom Savini plays sheriff of Nottingham and Kane Hodder plays Little John. I know that Savini likes to act in low and no budget movies and to be honest he can even give a nice performance but here, he's just awful like everyone else plus his screen time is extremely limited. Little better can be said about Kane Hodder who also has a strange tendency to appear in a movies as an actor lately. Well, I know he is Jason Voorhees, he is Victor Crowley etc but for God's sake he is a stuntman, without any acting talent. Surprisingly he's probably the best actor in the entire movie. Appears on screen 20 minutes before the end but from then, he is in pretty much each scene. If you are looking for a horror movie, better look somewhere else. It's being promoted as a horror movie but there are very few horror elements in the entire movie. For the most part It's just an adventure movie(boring one) with German woman and gay looking Robin Hood slowly falling for each other. The horror part starts in the last 20 minutes or so. Robin and his pals are turned into flesh eating zombies and run no budget havoc in the forest(which means they don't do anything really). There are few cheap gore tricks and two nice decapitations but It's just non existent for a movie which lasts for almost two hours. I really wanted to like this, I knew It's gonna be low budget but it was beyond bad, mostly because it was boring and English dubbing sucked big time. I know for sure that I won't watch this again in my life. I have seen worse movies but still it was very close to the bottom of filmmaking. I will give it three because of a beautiful locations, nice score and two names which were still kind of relief when compared with dubbed amateurs.

Not that bad for a mainstream movie..., 23 November 2012
6/10

I was hoping that 'Chernobyl Diaries' is gonna be a good movie. Whole idea of making the film in such a place is excellent, storyline sounds great too but execution...well It could be better. There are a good things about this project - settings are amazing, even though most of it was a real deal not a studio work I really feel this is how Chernobyl looks like today. Cinematography is quite well, same with editing. Acting is decent but the characters weren't developed too well, I never cared for any of leading characters. Dimitri Diatchenko was cool but his part was just too small. The movie has a pretty good first 30 minutes before the horrible happenings will occur. Later on, instead of being more and more interesting and thrilling it gets boring. Sure - people are running around in the maze of dark corridors but...nothing exciting happens. Ending is a typical cliché disappointment you would expect. All in all - It's good enough to see it more than once, mostly because you can actually feel the atmosphere of this abandoned place and It's thrilling BEFORE you will realize what really lurks in the dark. There are many plot holes but it doesn't affect the movie that much.

The Collector (2009/I)
3 out of 8 people found the following review useful:
You don't want this in your collection..., 20 November 2012
2/10

I can't believe I actually spent a few quids on a DVD with this movie. Hey, it has Andrea Roth in it - can't be too bad, right? Wrong! Dead wrong! I always liked Roth, she is very good actress and It's always a pleasure to see her, especially in a horror film. What I failed to realize, this movie was written by a guy who wrote a few of 'Saw' movies. That explains pretty much everything and to be honest it looks and sounds just like the another part of 'Saw' series. What I mean by that? Mostly that It's horrible but let's see - editing is a nightmare, you can barely follow what happens on screen because the shots are so quick and very often blurred. There is a lot of violence and gore but not always visible properly because of the lousy editing. The killer goes into random people's houses, tortures and kills them oh and he also leaves 'gory' traps everywhere. Sounds much like 'Saw' doesn't it? Why in the world the killer is doing that, we will never know just like we will never see his face. All we know, he's pretty much unstoppable. There is not much acting here - for the most of time we see lead actor running around the house, trying to save the owners and escape. Andrea Roth is top billed here but she has maybe 3-5 minutes of screen time total and 2-3 lines or so(plus scream!). Ending leads us to a sequel(which they made this year) but It's still so horribly moronic I couldn't stop laughing. I wish I could say something good about 'The Collector' but I can't. Just by being another 'Saw' version it failed in my eyes in the first place but it also fails as a movie. If you like new MTV generation 'torture porn' movies - you will probably love this but if you are all about old time movie-making, just like me - you will hate it with a passion from the beginning till the very end.

Millennium (1989)
0 out of 3 people found the following review useful:
I was hoping for something better..., 14 November 2012
4/10

'Millennium' is quite ambitious movie, a little too ambitious for my taste. Very slow paced, quite naive and not written very well. There is an obvious amount of cheese in here(including 'future' human with a rubber head) but for the most of time It's damn serious movie. Kris Krisstoferson gives a really good performance and Cheryl Ladd is OK for the most of her screen time and that's it. Lawrence Dane and Gary Reineke of 'Rituals' both appear here in a small parts as well. Special effects are usually decent but sometimes they make this cheesy impression while movie tries to be dead serious. 'Millennium' suppose to be a thriller but there are no thrills here, really. It's rather slow paced SF drama. If you like movies like that, you won't be disappointed but if you expect something to keep you tense and entertained for a whole time, It's not your cup of tea.

3 out of 3 people found the following review useful:
Little too serious for a Filipino war movie!, 14 November 2012
5/10

'Assault Platoon' is one of many Filipino movies about Vietnam War, Prison camps etc. 7 former soldiers are hired to rescue prisoners from Vietnamese Prison camp. Obviously nothing is easy as it would seem to be... Antonio Reyes tried hard to make a very serious movie instead of regular Filipino trashy commando flicks. Can't blame him for trying but he really failed to deliver any entertainment. You can't go too serious with a same budget(very low) and very same faces from usual Filipino b- grade films. Storyline is pretty much the same like in million other war flicks, characters are not well developed, acting is non existent, special effects(if any) are cheesy and that would be completely cool with me if there would be a space for entertainment but sadly there wasn't. Everything is death serious which took all my fun. I was expecting something like Teddy Page movies and got a poor version of 'Platoon' or 'Rambo 2'. 'Assault Platoon' is obviously watchable, easy going movie but nothing to get excited about. Robert Marius plays the lead and he does a good job as usual with fighting/shooting/ shouting, not much space for acting and I believe he had better acting gigs('Cop Game' would be a good example). There is quite a lot of cheap shootouts, some fights and tortures but no - It's not gory, not that brutal as Filipino movies usually are and not that tense like I was hoping it would be. All in all, 'Assault Platoon' is rather forgettable movie. Too serious to be fun and to cheesy to be serious. Watch it once if you can find it, but It's not worth paying fortune to track down a copy.

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:
Not good enough to be a cult classic..., 12 November 2012
5/10

'Escape from New York' is a cult classic but a sequel doesn't come any close. Kurt Russell is washed up in here, never was a fan of his acting but could always appreciate him if he did a good performance. Here - he didn't. I mean he's still Kurt but his acting here could have been a lot better. There are nice supporting parts by Steve Buscemi, Stacy Keach and Cliff Robertson but nothing to be crazy about. Whole film is rather fast paced and we do have a lot of special effects on a good level which is always nice to see in a blockbuster movie. Music score by John Carpenter is probably the best thing in entire movie - It's tense as it should be which is great. I liked the satire on politics and society and there is nothing really bad about 'Escape from LA' but It's just not near that raw, brutal and tense as the original was. I found the movie to be OK at best. Russell couldn't keep me interested enough. Maybe one day I will give it a chance again but for now, I don't feel like I need to own it in my collection.

Sliver (1993)
0 out of 1 people found the following review useful:
One of Sharon Stone's worst..., 12 November 2012
4/10

'Sliver' is easily one of the worst entries in Sharon Stone's filmography. Written by a Joe Eszterhas - the genius who gave us 'Basic Instinct' (which obviously made Sharon famous) the film lacks to deliver. It's suppose to be a tense thriller but there is nothing tense about it. Whole thing lasts for almost 2 hours and is horribly boring for the most of it. Sharon Stone gives a decent performance as she always does but she's very, very far from her top. It's not 'Basic Instinct', hell It's even far from 'Year of the Gun'. William Baldwin is annoying as usual but he does his 'creepo' part quite OK. It was nice to see Tom Berenger, he was probably the best thing about the movie, his acting was kinda memorable so was his character. If you are looking for a tense, erotic thriller, you will be disappointed. It plays better as a drama, there is no suspense, no action, no real twists, nothing you would be excited about. 'Sliver' is barely watchable once. Do yourself a favor and pick the better choice.

0 out of 1 people found the following review useful:
Far from Stallone's best..., 11 November 2012
5/10

I remember seeing 'Demolition Man' for the first time in mid 90's when it came out on VHS. It was a huge deal then, fast paced, loaded with special effects...After watching this today, I have very mixed feelings. It's not a horrible movie by any means but It's also very, very far from the top. Sly Stallone gives a decent 'tough guy' performance, he used to deliver way better acting now and then but he's fine and he has a few nice on liners and Schwarzenegger joke rocks. Unfortunately he's the only one decent here. Wesley Snipes does his 'black gangsta' routine but he's not believable at all. Just a big, black guy who tries to be funny and scary all the time, but he's just too weak actor to deliver serious performance. Sandra Bullock has very little to work with here, she's more of an eye candy than actress in this movie. Special effects look dated in many scenes which is not a good thing when you know it was $57 mi lion dollar movie. All in all - It's obviously watchable film but I would say, one of Sly's worst entries and almost two hours? Way too long for such a movie.

Avenging Angel (2007) (TV)
Not exactly Sorbastic...., 8 November 2012
4/10

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

When you count on some movie to be good and then first credits appear and RHI Entertainment logo pops out, you know, you are in trouble. This is exactly what I have experienced with 'Avenging Angel'. Western starring Kevin Sorbo? Why not? Wings Hauser as a main villain? More than awesome. Unfortunately the movie itself wasn't awesome at any point and even though it was watchable, I am disappointed. The biggest problem I have with it is a slow pace, I mean very slow pace. Barely anything happens on screen, it was made for TV so forget about any real violence, forget about tits, forget about bad language, forget about over the top performances. Kevin Sorbo is aways good to see but man, he doesn't have much to play with here. He never was a great actor, more like a decent TV name and he does a decent TV job here. He doesn't seem to be much in his character, he's still Kevin Sorbo. Wings Hauser is pretty much useless here. I mean, he's Ramrod (from 'Vice Squad'), he's top notch actor but he's wasted here. We can only see him in a 3-4 short scenes, most of them are useless for the movie, Hauser appears only to remind local sheriff that 'squatters need to be gone'and disappears for a long time.Set design is decent, It doesn't exactly look like an old wild west but they did the best they could with a budget. Some actors like the sheriff and a leading lady are highly annoying and pretty wooden. There are no real shootouts, Kevin Sorbo shoots dead a few people and that's it. He also has one(one!) fight in the whole movie and looses. All in all It's a cliché western without an actual action, without any thrills with some serious script issues(sheriff who killed Sorbo's family and burnt his church can't recognize him after a year or so even though he looks exactly the same as he looked then). It doesn't work as a cheesy movie and it doesn't work as a serious film either. It's OK to watch once and forgot about it.


Page 1 of 4:[1] [2] [3] [4] [Next]