The year is coming to a close and I have a sure winner for the worst of the year. The only movie I voted 1 in 2010.
I took notes of my thoughts (as I usually do) but after 15 minutes I had listed so many problems that I decided to stop it: the list had gotten way too long. From that point on I just sat back and watched, asking myself if I should trust my eyes and ears: could a movie be that bad?
The story is ridiculous. Written by Keith Shaw under the name of Lindsay James (would that be the name he signs when he writes something that even he is ashamed of?)
Should I bother to disclose this? Well, the person we think will end up being right is - surprise! - right. Evidences are tampered, a venal "expert" is bought off - selling his "expertise" to the highest bidder -, a forensic lab technician also breaks the law, but the end justify all those less than laudable means. And, talking about laudable, the person who orchestrates all that is commended for doing that. (In 2 other movies I've watched recently where the cops planted or tampered with evidence, at least they ended up dead and looked upon in shame). I can only hope that law enforcement in my city works a little bit differently.
Direction is confusing. The director tries hard to makes us think in certain directions intending to surprise us. It certainly didn't work in my case.
Performances are laughable. I actually liked John Tench as the butler. Do you think you ever saw a stereotypical butler? The butler that jokes are made about? Well, think again and watch him. His scenes made the movie look like a spoof of horror movies. I thought Leslie Nilsen would show up next.
I may keep the DVD: it provides valuable lessons on how NOT to make a movie.
I took notes of my thoughts (as I usually do) but after 15 minutes I had listed so many problems that I decided to stop it: the list had gotten way too long. From that point on I just sat back and watched, asking myself if I should trust my eyes and ears: could a movie be that bad?
The story is ridiculous. Written by Keith Shaw under the name of Lindsay James (would that be the name he signs when he writes something that even he is ashamed of?)
Should I bother to disclose this? Well, the person we think will end up being right is - surprise! - right. Evidences are tampered, a venal "expert" is bought off - selling his "expertise" to the highest bidder -, a forensic lab technician also breaks the law, but the end justify all those less than laudable means. And, talking about laudable, the person who orchestrates all that is commended for doing that. (In 2 other movies I've watched recently where the cops planted or tampered with evidence, at least they ended up dead and looked upon in shame). I can only hope that law enforcement in my city works a little bit differently.
Direction is confusing. The director tries hard to makes us think in certain directions intending to surprise us. It certainly didn't work in my case.
Performances are laughable. I actually liked John Tench as the butler. Do you think you ever saw a stereotypical butler? The butler that jokes are made about? Well, think again and watch him. His scenes made the movie look like a spoof of horror movies. I thought Leslie Nilsen would show up next.
I may keep the DVD: it provides valuable lessons on how NOT to make a movie.