Reviews written by registered user
gundognc

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

Dredd (2012)
3 out of 7 people found the following review useful:
I AM THE REVIEW! (I'm not but I couldn't resist...), 9 September 2012
8/10

"Dredd"/"Dredd 3D" is not the Judge Dredd film that I'd like to have seen but it is an excellent attempt to bring the character back to the big screen (after the disastrous 1995 Stallone vehicle "Judge Dredd"). It is a simple film in which the titular hero is pitted against merciless enemies in the controlled environment of a locked down super- skyscraper. The genius of the Judge Dredd stories was to make us empathise with Dredd himself and his zero tolerance approach to the law. I can only hope that "Dredd" is successful enough for a more nuanced film to be made, there are many superb Dredd stories to work from.

PLOT OUTLINE

Judge-cadet (and psychic) Cassandra Anderson and her evaluating officer Judge Dredd respond to the scene of a multiple murder in the Peach Trees city block of Mega-City One. They are sealed inside by a ruthless drug- dealing gangster who is determined that they should not escape alive.

REVIEW

Filmed on significantly less than half the budget of the previous movie, the filmmakers have been forced to create a different, and in many ways more credible, Mega-City One. In "Dredd" we see an enormous city dotted here and there with towering, kilometre tall, city blocks. Roads filled with conventional vehicles and everything overshadowed by the towering Hall of Justice with its just-not-quite-fascist eagle emblem. It is a convincing setting that successfully highlights the gritty dystopian nature of Mega-City One.

This more practical approach extends to the costumes which take an intelligent approach to combining the iconic elements from the comics (the shield badge and eagle shoulder pad) into something that someone who isn't in a comic might actually wear.

One small disappointment for me was the guns. The Judge's sidearms were highly convincing but the villains all appeared to be carrying what one would think would be prized antiques (assuming the time-line to be somewhere between 2070 and 2100).

Karl Urban is excellent as Judge Dredd capturing his aggressive and humourless approach toward the rigid application of the law. He looks exactly as Dredd should and speaks his lines with total conviction. Olivia Thirlby as Anderson does a great job of injecting some humanity into the story and providing the audience with someone to identify with. The writer and director (and I suspect Ms Thirlby also) clearly understand that the best Judge Dredd stories are never *about* Dredd but about people who come into contact with him and the circumstances surrounding those events. Lena Hedley has little to do but what she does she does well.

The special effects are good, the addition of the time slowing drug offers some good opportunities for slow-mo violence. Despite the "3D" tag on the film I'd love to have seen this in good old fashioned 2D as I found the 3D elements distracting and jarring. I will be buying Dredd on Bluray as soon as it comes out. The story is, as detailed above, extremely simple and the film is a series of what have no doubt be described as "high-octane" set-pieces with little or nothing else. As several others on IMDb have said, I eagerly await the sequel.

NOTES

It seems worth providing some information for people who may not be familiar with the character of Judge Joseph "Joe" Dredd. Created in the late 1970s for the newly created British weekly comic magazine 2000AD, Dredd is perhaps one of the best examples of a mis-aimed fandom in history. He was, it is said, intended to be a satirical comment on then popular fears of a political descent into fascism (it is worth nothing that "V for Vendetta" was written at around the same time). For anyone who is interested in reading a Judge Dredd comic, I recommend the stories "America" and "The Pit" (both available as self contained graphic novels).

1 out of 4 people found the following review useful:
It's a rom-bomb-com!, 4 September 2010
5/10

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

While it is hardly high art, Knight & Day is a moderately entertaining bit of fluff. It's clearly been cynically designed to be film that men and women can both enjoy. The problem is that while you can make a good romantic comedy (there must be at least one, I suppose) and you can make a good comic thriller I think that a good romantic comedy thriller may be impossible. The elements are too disparate.

Tom "Bonzo Loony McInsaneypants" Cruise is his usual charming self and runs a good level of manic energy. I'd seen the trailer a few times and in typical Hollywood fashion it ruined just about all the best lines of the film. The moment where Cruise says "If anyone tries to stop me I'll kill myself and then her" should have been hilarious but having seen it in so many trailers it just seemed tired.

The word "kooky" could have been invented for Cameron Diaz and she is very charming in the film. Her transition from humble classic car restorer to international secret agent seems a bit unlikely but then so is this film so why not.

Spoiler

June (Diaz) gets onto a plane with Roy Miller (Cruise) and "wacky" violence ensues. Whilst June's in the kharzi Miller kills everyone on the plane and crashes it in a field.

Miller, you see, has absconded with a super-top-secret AA battery which can power a city. The US government want it back and think that Miller may have handed it off to June which puts her in the frame as well.

This kicks off a global chase much of which occurs offscreen whilst June, drugged by Miller, is unconscious.

End Spoiler

In the end Knight & Day is a compromise film. It's designed to be a good date movie. It has some crash-bang-wallop for the guys, some swoony-smoochy to keep the ladies interested and a bit of comedy to round it all off. All told it was moderately entertaining and for what it is designed to do it does fine. If you want to see a good film starring either Cameron Diaz or Tom Cruise there are better alternatives.

Centurion (2010)
5 out of 10 people found the following review useful:
My name is Gaius Nefarius Purpus and this is not the beginning or the end of my review..., 4 September 2010
10/10

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Centurion is about the Ninth Legion which may or may not have disappeared during the Roman occupation of Brittania. There has been some interest in the Ninth recently with the Arthurian kids film The Last Legion and the forthcoming Eagle of the Ninth project.

The film is vintage Neil Marshall (Dog Soldiers, The Descent, Doomsday etc.) in that it combines extreme gore with good dialogue and a high body count. The acting is universally excellent the special effects are good and the story exciting (if not at all complex).

Spoiler

It's 117 AD, and bang on time. Naughty Picts, lead by their king Gorlacon, are waging an effective guerrilla war against the occupying Roman forces. Michael Fassbender (or, as I shall hereforth call him, "The Fass") stars as Roman centurion, Quintus Dias who is captured by Gorlacon's forces when his outpost is overrun and his comrades slaughtered.

Meanwhile, Arigcola, governor of Brittania, dispatches the Ninth Legion under their General (Dominic West) on a mission to track down Gorlacon and destroy him. To assist he lends them his best underwear model... sorry, I mean his best tracker, a mute Pict called Etain (Olga Kurilenko). Along the way they happen across Quintus, who has escaped his pursuers and co-opt him into guiding them to the Pictish stronghold.

Soon after the Legion is ambushed and destroyed by Gorlacon's troops. Quintus and a small band of Romans survive and set off to save the captured general.

The rest of the film involves Quintus' small band of soldiers attempt to make it back to friendly territory whilst being relentlessly pursued by an angry Russian underwear model with a fur fetish.

End Spoiler

Neil Marshall is at his very best in stories about soldiers and in Centurion he is back on territory familiar from Dog Soldiers (2002). Barring the supernatural element there is some similarity in the tone of both films and I feel certain that if you enjoyed one you will enjoy the other. Both films involve a small unit of professional soldiers in a situation that they cannot control and seem unlikely to survive.

I can offer Centurion no greater praise than to say that it is almost as good as Dog Soldiers.

Predators (2010)
2 out of 5 people found the following review useful:
Masterful, 9 August 2010

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

As in the case of all immediate and great artistic successes, Nimród Antal's film speaks directly to the contemporary ear. When Predators was released, its director had been living for many years in France, and the film evinces more the influence of Rousseau and Stendhal than of Kafka or the Capeks. Antal is a man of the Enlightenment, and is not loath to champion reason over emotion, pointing out, as he has frequently done in his other works, that many of the worst disasters mankind has suffered were spawned by those who attended most passionately to the dictates of the heart.

Antal is the most unjudgmental of moralists. When Walton Goggins' character Stans says "I'm gonna rape me some fine b*tches" one immediately sees the deconstruction of our petty conventional mores about the nature of good and evil.

A film, even a film by so engagé a director as Antal, must be judged in terms of art, and not of its moral, social or political weight. There may be too much spilt politics in Predators for its own good. What is remarkable, however, is that a work so firmly rooted in its time seems so unlikely to become dated. The world has changed profoundly since 1987's Predator, but Antal's film seems as relevant now as the original did.

Only joking...

Predators is a worthy successor to Predator (1987). Predator films (and to a certain extend AvP movies as well) exist to try to keep us entertained for a little over an hour and a half with a good dose of mindless violence and enjoyable characters. To that end this film delivers admirably. The characters are hardly deeply drawn but are memorable and distinctive and, in a few cases, even hint at hidden depths.

All in all Predators is a cracking hour and three quarters of entertainment. It isn't great art but I was hardly expecting it to be.

I notice that there are now at least two types of Predator. New Predator (bigger jaws and different eyes) and Predator Classic. I think I prefer Predator Classic. I am also pleased to see that they've upgraded their gear from Hunter 3.0 to the more advanced Hunter 7 operating system.

Inception (2010)
3 out of 7 people found the following review useful:
It's turtles... turtles all the way down, 30 July 2010
5/10

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Inception is a relatively simple story made complex by the way that it is told. In that respect it is unsurprising that it was conceived at the same time that Christopher Nolan was making his breakthrough project Memento, again a simple story rendered complex by its presentation

SPOILER

Inception is about an attempt to insert an idea into the conscious mind of a dreaming subject in such a way as to make him believe that the idea is his own or originated from his own subconscious. This is the titular "inception". The subject is Cillian Murphy, heir to a vast corporate empire which is close to achieving a monopoly of power generation. The idea to be implanted is that he should break up his father's corporate empire. The prime motivator is businessman Saito (Ken Watanabe) who hires ideas thief Dom (Leonardo diCaprio) after the latter botches an attempt at extracting information from Saito's own dreams.

Dom assembles a team comprising an architect who will design the dream spaces (Ellen Page), someone who can impersonate others in dreams (Tom Hardy) and a drug specialist who can keep them under long enough to achieve their goal. Along for the ride is Dom's long suffering partner in crime Arthur (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) and Saito himself. Whether the scheme succeeds and how the story plays out I will leave to the viewer to discover.

END SPOILER

Much of the film revolves around explaining the process of entering and monkeying with people's dreams. In this Nolan is clever as dreams are a universal shared human experience. Thus the sensation of falling which often wakes people becomes a core element of the process of stepping up out of dreams and seems entirely convincing. Whilst we know that this is fantasy it has that crucial ring of believability to it and obeys its own laws so far as the requirements of narrative and suspense allow.

I suspect that people who have seen this film will fall into three categories. Males aged 14 - 21 will probably treat this film as a religious experience, ascribing it with all manner of "important" philosophical "truths". Males who were 14 - 21 in 1999 will, I suspect, hate it - accusing it of being a rip off of the "masterpiece" of their generation, The Matrix. Anyone else will probably see it, enjoy it and then forget it. I suspect that there is a pseudo- philosophical action film for every generation and this is simply the latest.

For all that, Inception is an enjoyable film. It is roughly 43% as intelligent as it thinks it is but it is well crafted, nicely filmed and excellently acted.

Leonardo diCaprio seems to have built a career out of playing damaged people with dark secrets in their past (his characters in Shutter Island, Blood Diamond, The Departed and, in fact, just about everything he has done in the last decade or so) but he is reliably good at it and is so here. Joseph Gordon-Levitt is brilliant as always, although sadly relegated to a side role. Ellen Page is good but her character simply exists to have the mechanics of the world explained to her and the audience, thus she has little chance to shine. The show-stealer is Tom Hardy who has almost all of the film's funny lines and all but one of the funny moments.

The special effects are impressive but restrained, as with the best films they support the story rather than become the point of it.

The weakest element is the plot which is very simple but then maybe it needs to be. With the added confusion of different layers of reality intermingling anything more complex would have required that moviegoers be handed a flowchart on leaving the cinema (which would have been very welcome in the case of 2004's Primer http://xkcd.com/657/large/).

In closing I'd like to add my own slant to the debate as to the closing scene. It strikes me that what is important is not whether it falls but the fact that Dom doesn't care if it does or doesn't. Perhaps the message is that reality is what we decide it is.

"30 Rock" (2006)
15 out of 35 people found the following review useful:
Studio 60 written by people who weren't talented enough to write Friends, 18 June 2010
1/10

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

On a colleague's recommendation I bought the first series on DVD. Fortunately my new set of three 30 Rock novelty coasters didn't cost too much otherwise I might be a little annoyed.

30 Rock is supposed to be based around the running of a hit late night comedy TV show. The problem is that it isn't, it's a rather lazy, relationship based comic soap opera which just happens to involve the employees of a TV station. The show-within-a-show is apparently effortless to make leaving plenty of time for the characters to get involved in "wacky" situations with "hilarious consequences". I quote the "hilarious consequences" because they mostly aren't. I offer into evidence the episode in which the main character is mistakenly set up on a lesbian date. Regardless of the fact that this is a joke that was out of date in 1985 it is handled without a jot of wit or humour. Another example is the pretty young girl in the office who wears increasingly skimpy outfits as we are invited to rock with laughter at the way the men leer at her. The gentle hum your can hear in the background is Benny Hill revolving in his grave.

A big part of the problem is that almost all the characters fall into one of two categories; embarrassingly stereotypical or Tina Fey. Starting with the stereotypes - the most obvious, though by no means the only, example is "Twofer" - so named because he is black and went to Harvard. This is a joke so bad that it just about qualifies as a monstrous insult. Tina Fey as Liz Lemon, head writer of TGS takes up most of the screen time. Sadly she manages to effortlessly combine being charmless, unfunny and annoying. The only exception, and possible saving grace, is Alec Baldwin's Jack, the Machiavellian GE studio executive in charge of the show-within-a-show. He is genuinely good. In all likelihood this is down to the simple fact that Baldwin has enough muscle to push his character a bit further and have some fun with it.

I suppose that I would have to admit that 30 Rock suffered massively in my estimation by comparison with Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip. On it's worst day Studio 60 was funnier, cleverer and more engaging than 30 Rock has so far managed. The irony of it all is that Studio 60 was a "serious" drama. In television, it seems, dumb beats smart every time. Witness the proliferation of reality television - America's Favorite Celebrity Big Brother's Survivor Dancing on Ice or whatever. The internet tells me both shows premiered within weeks of each other and from the word "go" it must have been depressingly obvious which one was going to survive.

Basically this show is comedy for thicko's - masquerading as something intelligent. I suspect that 30 Rock will run for 700 seasons and make bazillions for Fey but I cannot help weeping for all the Studio 60 we'll never see.

5 out of 9 people found the following review useful:
Rain, mud, blackest evil, curious accents, and crucifixion... its exactly like Somerset!, 25 May 2010
10/10

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I come from Wiltshire and we all know that Somerset is still beset by feudalism, the black death, witchcraft, blood sacrifice and random zombification.

Solomon Kane is a cracking little film with no pretensions beyond being jolly good swash-buckling fun. An excellent cast, an above average script and some fine special effects raise it far beyond its avowedly pulp source material (penned by Robert E. Howard of Conan fame).

Spoiler

We are introduced to 17th century sea reaver (pirate/privateer) Solomon Kane during the sack of a North African city. Unfortunately for him, Kane comes face to face with with one of Satan's minions who promises that, for all his black deeds, the devil plans to claim his soul for an eternity in hell.

As a result Kane renounces his wicked ways and enters an abbey; but the film really starts when his told by the abbot to head home to claim his inheritance in the West country. The Somerset-Devon border isn't a happy place and our hero is soon set about by bandits who rob him and leave him for dead.

Kane is rescued and befriended by a family of Puritans on their way to the new world. However they soon run into an army of zombieish soldiers, lead by a sinister figure in a gimp mask. Most of the family is murdered and the baddies abscond with the daughter. Her dying father charges Solomon with recovering said waif and promises that if he does so he will regain his soul.

Solomon charges off in pursuit and if the identity of the villain and the location of his headquarters comes as very little surprise to anyone who's been paying attention, it hardly matters.

End Spoiler

Solomon Kane is a superb bit of hokum which remains entirely true to the spirit of Howard's original works without, as far as I know, being an adaptation of an extant story. Purefoy is excellent, Pete Postlethwaite and Alice Krige add some gravitas and the moppet-in-peril succeeds in being likable and endearing where she could easily have been shrill and annoying. Jason Flemyn gets to go all Alan Rickman and ham up near the end but sadly only really has a cameo appearance. Perhaps most refreshingly there is a seriousness of tone which works well with the mud and rain and general bleakness of the film. Unlike much of the sword and sorcery genre this is likely to still look good twenty years from now - a test which it hard to claim is passed by Conan, Hawk or any other 1980's fantasy film.

In conclusion, then, I count this as excellent. Violent where it should be and engaging where it needs to be. When it comes out on DVD I will be happy to add it to my collection and will enjoy watching it again.

42 out of 74 people found the following review useful:
Where's Wesley Snipes when you need him?, 24 January 2010
1/10

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I can say nothing worse about Daybreakers than that I'd rather have been watching Blade 4 (presumably "Blade 4.0" or possibly "BL4DE").

Most recent vampire movies are utter balls. On the one hand it's all techno music, impractical clothing and farcical weaponry ("we've got glass bullets full of liquid sunlight", yeah... right, mate, whatever you say). On the other hand it's god-awful self absorbed teenagers blathering on about love and immortality and so on. Amazingly, Daybreakers manages to combine the worst of both worlds.

What we have here is a slow boring film with little action and a script so tired that it's difficult to listen to. There are whole sections of dialogue which sound like:

Character 1: Exposition, exposition, exposition.

Character 2: Really? What about exposition, exposition?

Character 1: Oh, that's exposition, exposition, exposition, exposition.

The cinematography is washed out near-black&white and the vampire characters all wander around in slow motion a lot. Most of the time it feels like you're watching an over-long Armarni perfume ad.

SPOILER

It's twenty-past the future and vampires rule the earth. The rapidly dwindling supply of uninfected humans are captured and farmed for blood resources. So far, so Matrix. The problem is that the blood supply is running out and as the vampires starve they start to mutate into violent, brainless nosferatu style monsters.

Ethan Hawke plays Edward, a haematologist who is frantically searching for a blood substitute to save the vampire race from total annihilation. Sam Neill's evil corporate vampire wants the substitute to ensure that his company makes even more money.

Edward runs into (quite literally) the human resistance and, because he's a caring vampire is brought in to help them. He's introduced to Willem Dafoe who explains how his vampirism was cured and before you can say "wow, that's an unlikely cure" Ethan's been whacked back to mortality and has a plan to stop the evil corporate blood farmers.

END SPOILER

A few people have likened this to Gattica and yes, it'd be very like Gattica if you took away everything which made Gattica a good film and added vampires.

I haven't seen any of the Twishite films but, dear God, I have to assume that the're better than this.

Avatar (2009)
25 out of 42 people found the following review useful:
300 million and they couldn't spend a buck-ten on the writing..?, 3 January 2010

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Avatar reportedly cost a staggering 230 to 310 million dollars if you are prepared to believe what Wikipedia claims. Me, I can't help thinking I'd rather have had either Terminator 5 or Aliens 7 or, given the budget, both.

Go and see Avatar for the visual spectacle – and believe me when I say that describing the visuals as spectacular is an understatement. Pandora is beautifully conceived and rendered, though obviously by people who have never been in a forest in their lives given the lack of dead trees, dead leaves, mud and general detritus. The plants, animals and people are convincing and beautiful.

The critics have been going on about this being a breakthrough in film-making technology but I can't see it. It looks good but doesn't look better than, say, Lord of the Rings. The wholly animated alien people, plants and animals are no more impressive than the CGI Gollum was a few years ago. I actually felt rather disappointed, I was expecting something new but this is more of the same computer jiggery-pokery.

Do not go and see it for the plot and writing. The plot is a monumentally formulaic "don't hurt the environment, man" riff. We have seen all the characters before in a hundred other films: the driven research scientist who's brilliance allows her to be rude to everyone; the greedy corporate schill prepared to do anything to ensure a profit; the battle hardened colonel with an itchy trigger finger; etcetera ad infinitum. The dialogue, while not awful, is dull and unmemorable, lacking any humour or wit.

Go and see it, the critics like it, most people like it, you'll probably like it. I thought it was okay with a side order of gigantically missed opportunity.

Spoiler

Giant corporation, "The Company" (Weyland-Yutani perhaps), plans to strip-mine the Eden-like planet/moon Pandora*. All that stands in their way are a race of technologically primitive aboriginals, the Na'vi (who suffer from what literary grammatologists call the "Fantasy apostrophe").

Jake Sully, a paraplegic former marine, is recruited by The Company to operate the titular alien clone "avatar" originally made for his deceased twin brother. Sigourney Weaver's driven botanist/anthropologist wants him to help her study the aliens and their environment. Colonel Doombringer wants him to deliver intelligence on the aliens so that he can destroy them and Mr Corporate McEvil (Giovani Ribisi) wants him to persuade the Na'vi to leave their giant tree house so that he can drill for the precious unobtainum beneath it**.

Jake, however, quickly becomes enamoured by the culture and ways of the Na'vi and his teacher, a stunningly gorgeous Na'vi called Neytiri (voice and, I assume, movements of Zoe Saldana). Coming to value the environmental harmony in which the Na'vi live, Jake leads them in a final battle to try to reclaim their world from the humans***.

End Spoiler

Expect a director's cut a few years after the DVD comes out where the voice-over has been removed and a bunch of unnecessary scenes added back in.

* Who names a planet Pandora, for God's sake? Seriously? Anyone who knows their mythology knows that Pandora's Box contained all the world's evil. It's like saying "I know, we'll call it Deathworld, that sounds nice right?".

** A quick google search indicates that "Unobtainium" is the material that Oakley use to make the frames for their shades (check it out if you don't believe me). This suggest the fascinating concept that, in the future, Oakley sunglasses have become humanity's primary means of exchange.

*** !BIG SPOILER! Which they unsurprisingly win – I couldn't help thinking that before the credits there would be a screen of text saying "Three years after these events, humans returned to Pandora, cleansing its surface with nuclear fire".

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:
Quite possibly the greatest kids movie of all time, 7 September 2009
5/10

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

AvP2: Requiem with a Vengeance is probably the best all-round family film of the decade, children will be entranced by the sickening violence and relentless gore, adults will enjoy the more philosophical questions surrounding how many aliens can burst from the belly of a pregnant woman.

This a film made by people who had a theoretical understanding of what constitutes a horror film and wanted absolutely no part of it. AvP2: The Phantom Requiem is, I think, the most calculatingly gratuitous film I have ever seen. There is an unwritten code in American film making that you don't off kiddies unless it is an essential part of the story. AvP2: The Requiem of the King kills its first child 5 minutes 11 seconds in, letting you know that no prisoners are going to be taken.

Spoiler

You could almost forget the spoiler. "It does what it says on the tin" would be an adequate description of the film. Nonetheless...

The pred-alien last seen bursting from the chest of our erstwhile (which means former) protagonist (which means hero) at the end of AvP goes wild on the predator mothership and causes it to crash in a small mountain town in one of the more foresty American states. Oregon or something like that I would imagine. Face-huggers are all over the shop and before you can say "generic plot" the place is crawling with the tooth-tounged drooling ones.

On (what I assume is the) Predator homeworld a predator gets a text message saying that he should head off to Earth for some merry alien hunting. Or maybe he's a pest control expert. Possibly he works for Rent-o-kill IN SPACE. Or something.

I cannot help wondering about the Predators. They've built a machine age civilization far in advance of our own. What's the hunting about? Are the predators we see in the various films sort of hyper-tech rednecks metaphorically off in their pick up truck for a bit of beer and deer? Or is it some sort of holiday? Are they all bored star-accountants and future-lawyers off on the space equivalent of a safari? Who knows or, quite probably, cares? Back in Onanism, Montana (or something) the story unfolds as a young man with an improbably hot girlfriend starts noticing that strange things are happening. Pred-o-kill arrives and soon enough there's a river of acid blood running everywhere.

Michelle Dessler (who obviously joined the army after faking her death in 24) comes home to see her husband and annoying child. She gives her daughter a night vision scope to play with and soon enough the kid spots an alien in the garden. This leads to one of the most epic moments in film history. Mummy and daddy run into the room. Child says "there's a monster in the garden" (they mostly come at night, mostly... apparently). Daddy walks over to the window says "honey there are no monsters" and gets eaten. It's brilliant. It's as if director had heard of A SUSPENSE but had never actually seen one in the wild.

The national guard is called in and gets comprehensively mupped. The townsfolk gather in the centre of town for a famous last stand and wait for the cavalry – unaware that the government plan to assist them WITH A NUKE! Michelle and co head for the hospital and its chopper where they discover that the pred-alien's been breeding by vomiting alien embryos down the throats of women in the maternity ward. The phrase "beyond sickening" doesn't begin cover it. I've seen some unpleasantness in my time but this rates an 11 on the Nasty-scale. Inevitably the pred-alien and the predator have it out in a big throwing-each-other-through-stuff fight before our heroes escape.

End Spoiler

This is a film to be avoided. Seriously, it'll warp you, I guarantee it. Be wary of anyone who says that they enjoyed it, they've gone wrong.

Having said that, I rather enjoyed this film. Granted the gore made Bad Taste look like a rather tame episode of The Antiques Roadshow but you've got to give the film makers credit for only missing the point by a couple of galaxies. The strange thing is that AvP2: Requiems of the Lost Ark is that it has good special effects and some competent acting on the part of the main leads.

WATCH AT YOUR PERIL


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