Reviews written by registered user
ghoultown

9 reviews in total 
Index | Alphabetical | Chronological | Useful

5 out of 5 people found the following review useful:
To Die For., 10 August 2016
10/10

I was curious about this because I really like the concept of the Joker. My brother knew it so he sent me the link.

It was very different than what I was expecting but it really got me curious about the New 52.I haven't really read enough to be knowledgeable about it. Before I saw this, I didn't think I would be.

One of the things I've always liked about the Batman Rogues Gallery was that they were only villains that could arguably be horror villains. This was the proof.

I was really intrigued by the portrayal of the Joker, because he really didn't seem like he was criminally insane to me. But rather he was a personification of evil. As subdued as the actor was, there was this sense of him guiding along Harley like a vampire would one of their victims.

It is, however, not for the faint of heart. It's the most violent version that I have ever seen. It's the perfect psychological thriller short.

Zorro (1975/I)
4 out of 4 people found the following review useful:
Works as Spaghetti Western, 27 April 2010
9/10

I have always been a fan of Zorro, especially the Guy Williams interpretation. Naturally I had to check this film out.

The first time I watched it, I wasn't really impressed. Not that it was bad, but I was expecting more than what I got, especially with the theme music. However, after a few more viewings, I fell in love with it.

A lot of it had to do with viewing more George Hilton and Sergio Corbucci spaghetti westerns and a lot of it had to with acquired taste I sadly admit.

However, with each viewing I love this film more and more. Duccio Tessari does a wonderful job mimicking the camera work Sergio Leone and Corbucci without copying any of them and Moustache is superbly hilarious as Sgt. Gonzalez. Alaine Delon masters the duel identities wonderfully. And now I love the theme music.

Please note though that this is an extremely budget spaghetti western. If you're expecting the Good the Bad and the Ugly you'll be disappointed.

5 out of 8 people found the following review useful:
Interesting Concept, 28 April 2009
6/10

It's definitely lacking, with the costumes, lighting and acting. Nediocre direction, and Tony Curtis is definitely miscast.

However, had they been given a better script, and bigger budget, it could have actually been something really good.

Since I'm only familiar with the first Boris Karloff movie, as well as the newer series of course, I'm not quite sure how the Mummy movies work.

But I found it really interesting that the girl who the Mummy's after keeps getting these dreams and hallucinations as if she were mad.

It's a horrible film. It has plenty of potential. However, the fact that it's untapped makes it seem worse than it really is.

The Crow (1994)
0 out of 1 people found the following review useful:
Darker Than The Dark Knight?, 9 August 2008
10/10

Of course, this is easily darker than the Dark Knight. It's rated R. Even if you see the edited version, it has a darker character.

First of all, the main character Eric Draven is much more of the classic knight in shining armor. All that he does, he's doing strictly for his princess. That being said, he couldn't care any less about the city he lived in.

And another thing; Bruce's parents died due to desperation., not some sick maniacs who ended up raping the mother. Well, they raped Eric's fiancée Shelley then killed both of them. Now he's back from the grave and he's out for revenge.

Not only is the hero darker, but the villains are as well. Out only to benefit themselves, they couldn't care less what carnage they had to do. Hell, they thought that was the fun part.

The acting was superb especially for an independent film, and the cinematography done by Dariusz Wolski is on par with A list films.

There's not a lot of plot. But is never important to a revenge story.

I think this is the best comic book movie ever.

2 out of 5 people found the following review useful:
Classic, 3 August 2008
10/10

Though totally fictional, there is a reality that is seen very little in films today, and the fact that this was made in 1972 makes it even more special.

Before this film, from at least what I know, crime dramas involving organized crime have always made it black and white; crime was wrong no matter what the circumstances were.

The complexity of a criminal being a truly honorable man (Vito Corleone), and his son (Michael) who has the greatest love for him is just remarkable. That being said, the irony of all that honor and love set inside a world of corruption and murder is very odd, but works quite well.

What I liked about it was that they used situations from real cases, such as an infamous Italian diner scene in New Jersey being similar to the assassination of Joe "The Boss" Masseria made possible by "Lucky" Luciano.

3 out of 5 people found the following review useful:
Lon Chaney's Comedic Match, 1 May 2008
8/10

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I adore the Ln Chaney version of "Phantom" and I appreciate Webber's version if only for the growing interest in the book, wish I find more of a mystery slash horror with the romantic aspects downplayed. I don't approve of the fact that Andrew Lloyd Webber made the relationship between Raoul and Christine less restrained.

Luckily since this is a comedic short with only Erik and Christine this version doesn't even have to bother with any other characters.

I thought I would still be waiting for another version to match up Lon's performance. I was dead wrong. Leslie Nielson is fabulous as Erik though, of course this is a spoof. It's still brilliant.

I especially appreciated the fact that Erik looked more like a living corpse than an accident victim. I still have as of yet to see a Phantom like that, other than Lon's.

However, I do not recommend this short if you don't like spoofs. Because this is in no way supposed to be taken seriously.

2 out of 4 people found the following review useful:
It's A Teleplay, 7 April 2008

First of all, this is no movie. It's a teleplay. that being the case, of course the sets won't be up to par with most people expectations unless you were to see it at the theater. That being the case, they worked rather well.

That being the case, you can't expect the same kind of effects quality that Pirates has. Unless, as I stated beore, you are going to a live theatrical production.

In which case, it's GREAT! Fabulous. A little corny, but what children's show isn't? And they stuck to the source material. How marvelous! In my opinion, this teleplay works well. It should be put on Broadway.

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:
For the Most Part..., 23 April 2006
7/10

I can understand why everybody hates this film, especially the fans if the ride, but I personally enjoyed it and can ignore the flaws.

The basic plot of the film is just as dark as the ride with the racism problems involved. The sets, costumes and makeup are wonderful, and the music which was based on the ride's music was beautiful. A lot of references to the ride are also made which excited me also.

The part I wasn't too fond of was the dialog itself, and especially their deliveries. Had they'd been less childish, but still children accessible I think it would have worked a lot better. David Berenbaum had a good story, but did lousy job with the dialect.

I also think that Eddie Murphy still could have worked well, had it not been for Rob Minkoff wanting to keep it so childish. I simply can't stand the face Jim Evers, Murphy's character, makes while he tries to shake the hand of Edward Gracy played by Nathaniel Parker. But with the dark visuals, I suppose a compromise had to be reached.

1 out of 4 people found the following review useful:
Horror-Fied Indy!, 18 November 2005
10/10

This is in my opinion the best of the trilogy but my opinion is bias because I like horror films more than the average action film. Yes, it's not the most pleasant of the trilogy but it is the most horror-based which is why I think it works. It's probably easier to compare to other archeology-based horrors like the Mummy or Horrors of India.

But than again, Raiders of the Lost Ark is darker considering the lack of humor. I just like the whole trilogy, but I prefer this one over the others, because that's just me. If want black humor, this is the best one. If you want drama and straight-up adventure, watch Raiders, and if you want light-hearted adventure watch the Last Crusade.